Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/806/2021

Surinder Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Cheshma Shahi Resorts - Opp.Party(s)

Devinder Kumar

18 Feb 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/806/2021
Date of Institution	:	22/11/2021
Date of Decision	:	18/02/2022

 

Surinder Kumar son of Sh.Tirloki Nath, r/o H.No.1571, Burail, Sector 45-B, Chandigarh.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

M/s Cheshma Shahi Resorts, NH 21, Chandigarh Kharar Highway, opposite Balongi Bus Stand, Mohali, Punjab.

… Opposite Party

CORAM :	SURJEET KAUR	PRESIDING MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                

ARGUED BY	:	Sh.Devinder Kumar, Counsel for complainant.
	:	OP ex-parte.

 

Per Surjeet kaur, Presiding Member

1.      The long and short of the allegations are that the marriage of complainant’s daughter was fixed for 30.04.2021, accordingly complainant had booked banquet hall with the Opposite Party and paid a sum of Rs.25,000/- as advance amount on 19.12.2020. Total amount of the function was settled for a sum of Rs.6,25,000/- for 400 persons. Copy of the estimate and advance payment receipt are annexed as Annexure C-1 & C-2. In the month of April, due to second wave of Covid-19, curfew and lockdown was imposed by the Chandigarh Administration as well as Govt. of Punjab and gathering in the functions in the marriage palace and banquet hall were not allowed. The Government only allowed 20 persons for marriage function. Later on 50 persons were allowed to attend the marriage function. Copy of the aforesaid order is annexed as Annexure C-3. As per complaint, in the last week of March, 2021, complainant informed the Opposite Party to cancel the booking of banquet hall and to refund the booking amount of Rs.25,000/-. The Opposite Party assured to the complainant that within 2 weeks they will refund the amount to the complainant, but failed to refund the amount with mala fide intentions and at last refused to refund the booking amount. The complainant served the legal notice through his counsel to the Opposite Party. Copy of legal notice and postal receipt are annexed as Annexure C-4 to C-5. The act of Opposite Party is indulging in unfair trade practices, deficiency in services, the complainant filed this present consumer complaint.     
2.     Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Party, seeking its version of the case. However, nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Party despite service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte on 02.02.2022.
3.     Complainant led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
4.     We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the record of the case. After perusal of record, our findings are as under:-
5.     It is evident from Annexure C-1, dated 19.12.2020 that the complainant paid amount of Rs.25,000/- as advance payment for the purpose of getting her daughter’s marriage conducted at the banquet hall of the Opposite Party. The sole grouse of the complainant is that due to unavoidable circumstances in the peak period of the Covid-19 and due to lockdown and restriction imposed by the Government, it was not possible/allowed to conduct the marriage function for 400 persons as in the case of complainant’s daughter. Hence, in the March 2021, the complainant due to restriction by the Government cancelled the booking of the banquet hall and requested for the refund of the booking amount. Even legal notice was also served on 29.09.2021, but the same also was not replied by the Opposite Party.
6.     Significantly, Opposite Party did not appear to contest the claim of the complainant and preferred to proceed against ex-parte. This act of the Opposite Party draws an adverse inference against it. The non-appearance of the Opposite Party shows that it has nothing to say in its defence against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted. Hence, the act of Opposite Party for non-refunding the advance payment despite providing no service, non-replying the legal notice and most importantly non-appearing during the proceedings of the present case proves deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on its part.
7.     In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly partly allowed. Opposite Party is directed as under :-

1. To refund amount of ₹25,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the respective date of deposit till realization.
2. to pay an amount of ₹10,000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him;
3. to pay ₹5,000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

8.     This order be complied with by the Opposite Party within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, it shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
9.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-
18/02/2022	[Surjeet Kaur]	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
Ls	Presiding Member	Member