Haryana

Karnal

622/2012

Navneet Khurana S/o Partap Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

MakeMy Trip India Pvt.Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Rahul Bali

04 Nov 2015

ORDER

THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No.622 of 2012

                                                               Date of instt. 24.12.2012

                                                               Date of decision: 10.11.2015

 

Navneet Khurana son of Sh.Partap Singh Khurana resident of House No.318-LP, Sector-8, Urban Estate, Karnal.                                                …….Complainant.

                                  Vs.

1.Make My Trip India Pvt.Ltd.Tower –A, SP Inforcity, 243, Udyog Vihar, Phase-I, Gurgaon – 122016 through its authorized representative/Managing Director.

2.Sh.Ahzar Khan Pathan, Authorized Representative for Make My Trip India Pvt.Ltd. Tower –A, SP Inforcity, 243, Udyog Vihar, Phase I, Gurgaon – 122016.

3.Sh.Pardeep Kalra, Founder and CEO , Make  My Trip India Pvt.Ltd. Tower-A,  SP Inforcity, 243, Udyog Vihar, Phase I, Gurgaon – 122016.

4.Country Inn And Suites by Carison, Khasa Kothi Circle, MI Road, MIRoad, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302001, through its authorized representative.

                                                           ……… Opposite parties.

                                                                                                    

                   Complaint u/s 12  of the Consumer

                     Protection Act.

 

Before          Sh.K.C.Sharma……. President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma ………Member.

                   Smt.Shashi Sharma…..Member. 

 

 Present:       Sh.Rahul Bali Advocate for the complainant.

                   Ops  e xparte.

 

ORDER:

 

                        The facts giving rise to the present complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act1986,  ( herein after referred to as the Act) are that complainant planned to join marriage at Jaipur alongwith  his family i.e. wife and two kids, therefore, he contacted the Opposite Party ( in short OP) No.1  vide e-mail on 6.9.2012  with intent to book a hotel for his stay there. Booking of complainant  and his family members was confirmed in “Country Inn And Suites BY Carison, Jaipur”  which is a five star hotel situated at Khasa Kothi Circle, MI  Road, Jaipur.  As per terms of the booking the complainant was allotted room No.1 from 22..11.2012 to 25.11.2012 i.e. for three nights for two adults and two children and daily rate was Rs.5653/- and charges for extra bed were Rs.4500/- with total amount of Rs.21456/- taxes and service fee Rs.2614/- .  The complainant was also given promotional discount of Rs.3300/-. Thus, total amount of Rs.20783/- was paid by the complainant vide debit card of his wife. On the assurance of  OPs No.1 to 3,  the complainant and his family members visited the Hotel OP No.4 on 22.11.2012 at about 2.00PM.  On contacting the staff on the reception, the complainant was surprised and shocked to learn that OPs no.1 to 3 had  made no booking in the hotel of OP no.4 in the name of  complainant. On that  the complainant repeatedly contacted officials of OP No.1  namely Ms. Shilpa, Rubi and Abhinav but they expressed helplessness . At about 4.15PM Mr.Deepak  on behalf of OP No.4 spoke to the  official of OPs No.1 to 3 and after brief communication, at about 4.23PM, room was given to the complainant and his family members. Officials of OPNo.4 made it clear to the complainant that room  was being given  as per  booking   for 22.11.2012 only and he and his family members will have to vacate the room and shift their luggage to other place and they could return to the Hotel  on 24.11.2012 and checkout on 25.11.2012.  .  On 23.11.2012 complainant and his family members  were made to shift to Hotel Man Singh, Sansar Chandra Road, Jaipur, which is not a five star hotel and they stayed in room No.216 of the said hotel on 23.11.2012.  On 24..11.2012 they came back to Hotel  OP No.4  and stayed there and checked out on 25.8.2012 at 8.54AM.  Inspite of advance booking  about two and a half months earlier, the complainant and his family members were made to face difficulty and the complainant was  let down in the eyes of his wife and kids on account of deliberate  negligence and lack of coordination between the OPs no.1 to 3 and OP No.4. Such act and conduct on the part of the Ops amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, which caused mental harassment to the complainant. It has also been alleged that no facility of extra bed was provided to the complainant and his family members either in the first hotel or in the second hotel and he and his wife  had  to pass their whole night on the floor without any blanket or mattress or pillow.

 

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the Ops who put into appearance. OPs No.1 to 3 filed joint written statement controverting the claim of the complainant on various grounds. Objections have been raised that complaint is not maintainable in the present form; that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint and that there was no  deficiency in services on the part of OPs No.1 to 3.

 

                   On merits, it has been submitted that Ops no. 1 to 3  only acted as facilitator for booking one hotel room in “Country Inn And Suites BY Carison, Jaipur”

 for the complainant on 6.9.2012.  As it was online booking, the entries were made by the complainant on Web portal of answering Ops and that on that basis the desired bookings were made. The payment of the said booking were made by the complainant and accordingly the same was sent to OP no.4 by the answering Ops. Subsequently, if any default as alleged by the complainant was made, by not providing service by the OP No.4 the  answering  Ops cannot be held liable as per provisions of Section 230 of the Indian Contract Act,. 1872.  It has further been pleaded that on 20.11.2012 the answering Ops received e-mail of OP no.4 regarding refusal to accommodate the complainant and some other customers  of answering Ops no.1 to 3 in the hotel as mentioned in para no.12 of the written statement, due to some unavoidable circumstances. On receipt of the  aforesaid  e-mail from the Country Inn, Ops no.1 to 3 had discussion with the concerned persons  and after much deliberation all the customers including complainant were accommodated as per their requirement. Booking of the complainant was confirmed in the same hotel for all days except one day i.e. 23.11.2012. The complainant  was accommodated in Five Start Hotel Man Singh for 23.11.2012  and  conveyance arrangement  was also taken care of.  Irrespective of all those developments, when complainant approached the answering Ops with the complaint of alleged difficulties faced by him, during his stay in Jaipur, the answering Ops being customer oriented company made the full refund of the booking amount to him  on 15.1.2013. Thus, there was no defficiency in services on the part of Ops no.1 to 3 and if there was any fault in performance of contractual obligation by the Hotel Country Inn And Suites BY Carison, Jaipur- OP No.4, then the OP no.4 was responsible to explain the allegations and grievances  if any of the complainant. It has also been alleged that the complaint is false, frivolous and  vexacious, malafide and  as such not tenable. It has further been averred that as per the jurisdcition clause of the User Agreement, only the courts of National Capital Region have territorial jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaints if any arises. Therefore, this Forum lacks jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint.

 

3.                In the evidence of the complainant affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C9 have been tendered.

4.                On the other hand, in evidence of OPs no.1 to 3, affidavit of Sh.Aakansha Manager Legal of OPs no.1 to 3 Ex.RW1/A and document Annexure A have been filed.

 

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file very carefully.

 

6.                There is no dispute between the parties that complainant got booked one room in  five star hotel, Country Inn And Suites BY Carison, Jaipur, from 22.11.2012 to 25.11.2012 through OPs no.1 to 3. He got  booked the room vide e-mail dated 6.9.2012 and paid a total amount of Rs.20783/-   vide debit card of his wife.  As per allegations of the complainant, he alongwith  his wife and two children visited hotel OP No.4 Country Inn And Suites BY Carison, Jaipur  on 22.11.2012 . He was told that there was no booking in his name but after contacting various officials of OPs No.1 to 3, he was given one room and was told that he will have to vacate the room and shift the luggage  to other place on 23.11.2012.  He stayed in the said hotel on 22.11.2012 and 24.11.2012 and checked out on 25.11.2012, but was made to stay  in Hotel Man Singh, Sansar Chandra Road, Jaipur for 23.11.2012.  He  and his family members faced lot of difficulties on account of negligence and lack of coordination  between the OPs No.1 to 3 and OP no.4.

 

7.                The Ops no.1 to 3 apart from raising other pleas, raised the plea of territorial jurisdiction of this Forum  to entertain and decide the  present complaint. It has been averred that booking was done through internet  Web/Portal  of OP no.1 therefore,  no cause of action accrued to the complainant at Karnal. Under such circumstances before adverting to deal with the other aspects of the case, it is necessary to decide the question of jurisdiction of this Forum to entertain and decide the present complaint, because if this Forum has jurisdiction, only then the other aspects are to be dealt with and if this Forum has no jurisdiction, then there would be no need to dwell upon the other aspects of the case.

 

8.                The learned counsel for the complainant laid emphasis on the contention that the complainant booked the room in hotel OP No.4, from 22.11.2012 to 24.11.2012 through OP No.1 vide internet  on   Web Portal of OP no.1 from Karnal. The amount of booking was paid to OP No.1 at Karnal, vide debit card of his wife. Thus, cause of action initially accrued to the complainant at Karnal and as such this Forum has territorial jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint. In support of his contention, he placed reliance upon  A.B.C. Laminari Pvt. Ltd. and another Vs.A.P. Agencies, Salem AIR 1989 Supreme Court 1239 wherein it was held  by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that an agreement to oust absolutely the jurisdiction of the court will be unlawful and void being against public policy.  The making  of  the contract is part of the cause of action.  A suit on a contract, therefore, can be filed at the place where it was made. Making of an offer on a particular place does not  form cause of action  in a suit for damages for  breach of contract. Ordinarily, acceptance of an offer and its intimation result in a contract and hence a suit can be filed in a court within whose jurisdiction the acceptance was communicated. The performance of a contract is part of cause of action and a suit in respect of the breach can always be filed at the place where the contract should have been performed or its performance completed.

 

9.                 There is no dispute regarding proposition of law laid down in the aforecited authority, but the same does not cut any ice  in favour of the complainant under the facts  and circumstances of the present case.  The complainant had booked the room of hotel OP no.4 at Jaipur, through OPs no.1 to 3 by sending e-mail and the payment was made through debit card of his wife. Booking was confirmed by OP no.1 to 3 at Karnal. However,  the breach of contract  occurred at Jaipur. The office of OPs no.1 to 3 is located at Gurgaon and hotel OP No.4 is situated at Jaipur. Mere fact, that booking through e-mail  was made from Karnal and payment was made vide debit card of the wife of complainant and booking was confirmed at Karnal, could not give any cause of action to the complainant to file the complaint at Karnal, rather the cause of action accrued to him at  Jaipur, where he was not allowed to stay in the room of hotel of OP No.4 on 23.1.1.2012 as per the booking. Similar matter was considered by the Hon’ble State Commission, Haryana  in case  titled as Make my Trip(India) Vs.Dr.Ravi Ghai  First Appeal No.458 of 2009 decided on 25.01.2012wherein the complainant approached  Make my trip (India) at Panchkula through internet and submitted proposal about trip of his family to Cochin  and Make my trip arranged four adult  tickets of the  flight G8-162 from  Delhi to cochin  and supplied details of charges to the complainant who remitted the amount from credit card  account with ICICI Bank  Branch office, Panchkula .  The complainant and his family members boarded their plane, but same did not reach  Bombay at scheduled time and arrived 90 minutes late, due to which they could not board flight from Bombay to Cochin and were put into  great  embarrassment, inconvenience and awkward position .   The Hon’ble State Commission relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled Sonic Surgical Vs.National Insurance Company Limited, 2010 CTJ 2 and held that District Consumer Forum Panchkula had no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaint. It was observed that complainant had purchased air tickets from Make my trip(India) , the office of which is located at Gurgaon, therefore, complaint could be  filed at Gurgaon and not at Panchkula.  Merely, the fact that complainant contacted Make my Trip(India) through internet at Panchkula, would not confer jurisdiction upon the District Forum, at Panchkula. Such like communications cannot be made ground for the claimant to choose jurisdiction of the District Forum from where internet communication or telephonic  conversation was made by the complainant. If, such practice is allowed to be sustained, in that eventuality, the same would be against the settled law  in Sonic Surgical’s case (Supra).

 

10.               The law laid down by the Hon’ble State Commission in  Make my Trip(India)’s case (Supra) squarely covers the facts of the present case, as the complainant got booked room in the hotel OP No.4 through OPs no.1 to 3 vide internet communication and paid the amount of booking by way of credit card . The office of OPs no.1 to 3 is situated at Gurgaon and hotel OP no.4  where the complainant was allegedly not provided room for 23.11.2012  as per his booking is  at Jaipur.  Therefore, this Forum at Karnal has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint.

 

11.               As this Forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint, there is no need to deal with the other aspects of the case.

 

12.               As a sequel to the foregoing discussion, we hold that this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint. Therefore, the same is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced
dated:10.11.2015                                                                            

                                                                (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 (Anil Sharma)       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member.

 

 

Present:        Sh.Rahul Bali Advocate for the complainant.

                   Ops  ex-parte.

 

                   Arguments in part heard. For remaining arguments, the case is adjourned to 10.11.2015.

 

Announced
dated:04.11.2015                                                                            

                                                                (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 (Anil Sharma)       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member.

 

 

Present:        Sh.Rahul Bali Advocate for the complainant.

                   Ops  ex-parte.

 

                   Remaining arguments heard. Vide our separate order of the even date, the present complaint has been dismissed. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after  due compliance.

 

Announced
dated:10.11.2015                                                                            

                                                                (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 (Anil Sharma)       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member.