IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/199/2017.
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
27.11.17 11.12.17 11.09.19
Complainant: Debajyoti Ghosh
S/o Aloke Ghosh
Beside CID Office
PO&PS-Berhampore
Dist-Murshidabad, Pin-742101
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Manager, OYO Rooms
Oravel Stays Private Ltd.
Unit-325, B-2 Tower,
Spaze I – Tech, Park,
Sohna Road, Sector-49,
Gurgaon-122002, Haryana.
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Sri. Pranab Kumar Das.
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party : None.
Present: Sri Asish Kumar Senapati………………….......President.
Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.
FINAL ORDER
Aloka Bandyopadhyay, Member.
One Debajyoti Ghosh (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against the Manager, OYO Rooms (here in after referred to as the OP) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.
The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-
The Complainant booked one double bedroom in the Hotel Trimurty Heights situated at Grant Road, Puri on 12.08.17 for 3 nights from 14 October - 17 October, 2017 through OP and for that the Complainant paid Rs.3,262/- from his SBI account of Berhampore Foujdari Court Complex. After payment, the Complainant sent E-booking invoice to the Complainant through E-mail., On 14 October 2017 when the Complainant arrived at Hotel Trimurti Height at about 6.20 A.M, he came to know that no booking was there in favour of the Complainant in that Hotel. The Complainant tried to contact with the authority of the OP and they replied for the arrangement to another hotel but the authority of the OP did not arrange any alternative accommodation till 8 A.M. So, the Complainant himself arranged for another hotel . At about 11.30 A.M. the Complainant received a phone call from the OP who communicated that arrangement for another hotel has been done by them but the Complainant refused to opt the opportunity as because he has already made an arrangement for staying in another hotel and requested the OP to refund the said booking amount but the OP did not refund the same till today. Finding no other alternative, the Complainant filed the instant case for appropriate relief. The OP after service of the notice, did not turn up. So, the case preceded ex-parte against the OP.
Now the question arises, whether the Complainant is a Consumer and he is entitled to get relief as prayed for?
Decision with reason
The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the Complainant is a consumer as she hired services of the OP for consideration.
On going through the complaint,and other materials on record and on a careful consideration over the submission of the Complainant, we find that the Complainant is a consumer in terms of section 2 (I )(d) (ii) of the C.P.Act, 1986.
Undoubtedly, the Complainant booked the Hotel Trimurti Height vide booking No. ZABS5206 dated 12.08.2017 for the period from October 14 - October 17 i.e for three nights and the OP issued the receipt of payment of Rs.3,262/- in this regard. As per petition of complaint, on 14 October 2017 when the Complainant arrived at Hotel Trimurti Height at about 6.20 A.M, he came to know that no booking was there in favour of the Complainant in that hotel and came to know that the OP has not booked the said Hotel though the complainant has deposited required charges in this regard and the Complainant became harassed and he has to make alternative arrangement in that unknown place. It is a fact that the complainant was sure that he will get room in Trimurti Heights as he has already booked the Hotel through this O.P but the OP has not booked that hotel and not provided alternative accommodation till 8 A.M on 14 October 2017 and also not refunded the booking amount of Rs.3,262/- . The OP after service of the notice, did not turn up. So, the case proceeded ex-parte against the OP and we have no other alternative but to accept the version of the complainant..
Considering the facts and circumstances of the caseand documents filed by the Complainant and argument advanced by the Ld Advocate, we hold that there is deficiency of services on the part of the O.P by not providing accommodation to the complainant .So the complainant is entitled to receive the booking amount along with litigation cost and cost for mental pain and agony. In our considered opinion , the complainant is entitled to get Rs. Rs.10,000/- for deficiency in service andmental pain and agony. We also think that the complainant is entitled to get Rs. Rs.1,000/-as litigation cost against the OP.
Reasons for delay
The Case was filed on 27.11.17 and admitted on 11.12.17 . This Forum tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act,1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.
In the result, the Consumer case succeeds.
Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint Case No. CC/199/2017 be and the same is hereby allowed ex-parte against the OP with cost of Rs.1,000/-.
The OP is directed to pay Rs.3,262/- to the complainant.
The OP is further directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- and Rs.10,000/- for deficiency in service and mental pain and agony to the complainant.
All the aforesaid order must be complied within 60 days from the date of this order.
Let plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand /by post under proper acknowledgment as per rules, for information and necessary action.
The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:
confonet.nic.in
Dictated & corrected by me.
Member
Member President.
