JUDGEMENT

          Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that op runs a business of Hotel Booking Package Tour and books hotels and rooms for intending tourists in various parts of India and complainant contacted with the op for booking a room in Puri for few days at the end of December, 2012 and during conversation with the op the complainant, stated distinctly that if the railway tickets are not confirmed for their schedules date of travel then the room booking should be extended for a certain period.  The op assured the complainant that they will provide the extension subject to prior intimation.

          Being satisfied with the assurance of the op, complainant booked an A/C Deluxe room in Hotel Bangalakshmi Enclave at New Marine Drive Road, Swagadwar, Puri through the op from 22.12.2012 to 25.12.2012 vide receipt No. 462 dated 17.10.2012 amounting to Rs.7,920/- including all fares and taxes.  On 27.11.2012  complainant called upon the op requesting the op to extend the said booking because the latest position of the railway tickets indicates that it may not be confirmed.  So, the op assured the complainant stating that more than a month is left for the journey, so the complainant should call later.

          But unfortunately railway ticket of the complainant was not confirmed even on 17.12.2012 when their journey was to be started on 21.12.2012.  So the complainant on 17.12.2012 after waiting for 25 days called upon the op twice thereby requesting to extend the booking since the railway booking of the complainant was not confirmed.  But op denied all the assurances made by him on the face of the complainant and op stepped back from his assurances and as a matter of fact complainant was compelled to send a notice either to extend the booking or refund the sum of Rs.7,920/- though his Ld. Advocate on 20.12.2012.

          Op replied to the notice dated 20.12.2012 through their Ld. Advocate on 22.12.2012 and denied each and every allegation and suppressed the phone calls.  At the very instance op must have performed their jobs sincerely and should have considered the mental agony, harassment of the complainant.  But anyhow op did not refund the said amount though complainant before reported the situation and the complications by adopting unfair trade practice op tried to grab the entire deposited amount and in the above circumstances complainant has prayed for relief and redressal.

          On the other hand op by filing written statement submitted that the entire allegation is false and fabricated and op has denied the cause of action for this case also and submitted that op never assured the complainant for extending the booking period and op did not admit the correctness statement contained therein in respect of the allegations and further submitted that the entire case is misconceived and barred by non-joinder and mis-joinder and necessary parties and particularly complainant has no cause of action and entire case is false for which same should be dismissed.                                                                 

                                               Decision with reasons

          On proper consideration of the complaint and written version and also relying upon the argument as advanced by the Ld. Lawyer of both the parties and also considering the advance booking receipt No.482 dated 17.10.2012 it is found that complainant deposited a sum of Rs.7,200/- and from the said receipt, it is found that complainant booked A/C Deluxe room in Bangalakshmi Enclave on top floor sea facing through op at Puri Swargadwar for the period from 22.12.2012 to 25.12.2012(3 days) and that matter is undisputed.  But truth is that complainant on 27.11.2012 and also on 17.12.2012 on three occasions talked with the op over phone which is evident from the call register of the phone of the complainant and it is found that op’s Mobile No. 9831783971 and op has not denied that fact.  But it is also proved from the letter address to the complainant dated 20.12.2012 that complainant requested the op for extending the time due to un-avoidance circumstances or to refund the entire amount and against the op wrote a letter through his Ld. Advocate on 22.12.2012 stating that complainant booked a room from 22.12.2012 to 25.12.2012 under condition that booking will not be cancelled and money will not be refunded at any circumstances.  But it is specifically mentioned by the op in the letter that complainant demanded cancellation of the said booking and requested for refunding of the money deposited as booking amount.

          It is further submitted that extension of booking may be considered when the original booking is availed by the client subject to availability of the rooms but extension does not make and for which change of his booking dates.  So the contention of the complainant is not correct at all and it is further submitted as because complainant did not enjoy the facility without any problem therefore the entire allegation of the complainant is baseless and false and for which complainant is not entitled to get any relief or refund of money.

          After proper consideration of the argument of the Ld. Lawyer and the booking slip, it is clear that booking was made for three days journey from 22.12.2012 to 25.12.2012 for their stay at Puri.  But anyhow op has failed to show that during that period the said rooms were lying vacant and practically op tried to suppress that fact whether that the said hotel rooms were vacant or occupied by other tourists and in this regard op is silent moreover has not produced any documents of the Bangalakshmi Enclave hotel to that effect the said amount which was received by the op and was deposited in the account of the Bangalakshmi Enclave Hotel.

          Another factor is that on 27.11.2012 and 17.12.2012 no doubt complainant reported the matter to the op requesting him to refund the money or for extension of the period because complainant failed to get confirm railway ticket.  Whatever it may be it is proved beyond any manner of doubt that op has failed to prove that he booked the rooms at Bangalakshmi Enclave Hotel for the period from 22.12.2012 to 25.12.2012 and fact remains the op is not the owner of that Hotel.  But he is an agent and it is the duty of the agent to show that the amount of Rs.7,200/- which was received by the op from the complainant was invested to the account of said Bangalakshmi Enclave Hotel.  But op has failed to prove that and fact remains after receipt of the phone calls from the complainant, op did not deposit that amount and if actually that had been deposited by the op to Bangalakshmi Enclave Hotel in that case op shall have to handover that receipt of the Balgalakshmi Enclave Hotel to the complainant.  But till the completion of the case and till completion of the hearing argument, op did not produce it and most interesting factor is that op has failed to show that he invested that amount to Balgalakshmi Enclave Hotel or booking the said rooms.

          On the other hand op has failed to show that said rooms of the Balgalakshmi Enclave Hotel were vacant for three days and entire amount received at advance by the op was already received by Balgalakshmi Enclave Hotel.  So, considering all the above fact, it is clear that op has tried to swallow the entire advance amount of Rs.7,200/- with ulterior motive and it is known to all if any hotel room is booked through any agent within 48 hours must have to handover the receipt of the hotel authority that it has been booked but no receipt was handed over to the complainant.

          So, we are convinced to hold that op with an ulterior motive after getting such information from op on 17.11.2012 and did not book the Balgalakshmi Enclave Hotel room and for which op has failed to produce any document from the hotel authority of Balgalakshmi Enclave Hotel and further op has failed to trust that Balgalakshmi Enclave Hotel did not handover the said so called rooms to three persons and it was vacant for the period 22.12.2012 to 25.12.2012.

          Taking into all those circumstances into consideration and the conduct of the op, we are convinced that op has tried to grab the entire advance amount purposefully and for which their objection and their evidences are all very hazy without any positive answer and in the above circumstances we are inclined to hold that complainant is entitled to get back the said amount after deduction of Rs.200/- as administrative charges and so op shall have to pay Rs.7,000/- to the complainant within 15 days from the date of this order failing which op shall have to pay penal interest @ Rs.200/- per day till full satisfaction of the same.

          In the result the complaint succeeds.

          Hence, it is

                                                          ORDERED

          That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest with cost of Rs.3,000/- against op.

          Op is directed to refund of Rs.7,000/- to the complainant within 15 days from the date of this order failing which for non-compliance of the Forum’s order op shall have to pay punitive damages @ Rs.200/- per day till full payment of decretal amount to the complainant and if same is collected same shall be deposited to the present Forum.

          Op is directed to comply the order very strictly within the stipulated period failing which penal proceeding shall be started against him or implementation of the order and for that reason he may be further faced or imposed penalty