DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 272 of 13.7.2016

                                      Decided on:                   25.4.2018

Rajesh Kumar son of Raj Kumar, resident of House No.1151, Street No.11, Gurbax Colony, Patiala.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

Ms. Hardik Vekariya Make My Trip India Pvt. Ltd., Tower A, SP Infocity 243, Udyog Vihar, Phase-1, Gurgaon, Haryana-122016.

                                                                   …………Opposite Party

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                      Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

                                      Smt. Neena Sandhu, President

                                      Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member                    

ARGUED BY:

                                       Sh.N.K.Gupta,Advocate, counsel for complainant.

                                      Sh.Gaurav Singla, Advocate, counsel for opposite party.     

 ORDER

                                        SMT.NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT

Sh.Rajesh Kumar, complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as the O.P.)

2.       The case of the complainant is that he booked a room in a hotel ‘Sansar’ at Shimla for 26.12.2015 and 27.12.2015, through the website of the OP. It is stated that the amount of booking of hotel room was deducted from his account. He was allotted booking ID No.NH2106011861461 NH2106015191944. In this regard an email was duly sent by the OP to him. It is further stated that when he alongwith his wife reached in the said hotel at Shimla, he was shocked to hear about the non-confirmation of the booking. It was told by the concerned official of the hotel, that an email had already been sent on 24.12.2015 to the company/OP informing that booking of hotel was full on 26.12.2015. The complainant requested the concerned official of the hotel to book any other room in some other hotel but of no avail. However, at about 2.26 PM, the OP cancelled the booking  without his consent and offered him to book a hotel at his own level for which maximum limit was fixed as Rs.6000/- with the assurance that the amount would be adjusted/refunded by producing bills. It is stated that at the end of the day, the complainant with great difficulty managed to get a room in a hotel with very poor facilities and could not enjoy his whole tour.  He got served a legal notice dated 25.2.2016 upon the OP requesting it to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and physical harassment to him alongwith Rs.5500/-as cost of the legal notice but the OP instead of paying the amount gave false and frivolous reply to the legal notice. There is thus deficiency of service on the part of the OP. Hence this complaint with the prayer for giving directions to the OP to Rs.50,000/-as compensation for causing mental agony and physical harassment; to pay Rs.11000/-as litigation expenses  and also to grant any other relief which this Forum may deem fit.

3.       On being put to notice, the OP appeared and filed the written version taking preliminary objections that the contents of the complaint are wholly misconceived, vexatious, misleading, misrepresented, unsustainable , false and frivolous; that this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present dispute and the complaint is liable to be dismissed. Further it is stated that when the cancellation of the hotel came in the knowledge of the OP, it immediately took all possible steps to  provide  some other hotel to the complainant but due to peak season the OP could not make any arrangement for complainant in time and was offered to make his own arrangements with the assurance that the additional amount spent/incurred by him would be duly refunded alongwith the refund of the booking cost that was incurred under the booking ID NH2106011861461 because the complainant duly availed the accommodation booked under Booking ID No.NH2106015191944. It is stated that out of Rs.3170/- charged for making the desired booking, the complainant was charged an amount of Rs.1460/-only and rest of the amount of Rs.2250/- was paid by way of e-coupons. On merits, it is stated that on account of technical snag, the amount of Rs.1460/- that was charged by the OP was refunded back to the complainant. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the OP. After denying all other averments made in the complaint, it was prayed to dismiss the complaint.

4.       On being called to do so, the ld.counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C8 and closed the evidence of the complainant.

          The ld. counsel for the OP has tendered in evidence Ex.OPA, affidavit of Ms. Ankita Mishra, Asstt. Manager of OP alongwith documents Exs.OP1 to OP2 and closed the evidence of OP No.2.

5.       We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties, gone through the written arguments filed by the ld. counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.

6.       The grievance of the complainant is that the OP did not inform him about the non confirmation of the booking of a room in Sansar hotel at Shimla for  26.12.2015 and a result whereof he had suffered a lot of inconvenience . This act of the OP amounted to deficiency in service on its part.

          The plea of the OP is that due to some technical snag ,booking  could not be confirmed and on receipt of the complaint from the complainant regarding stuck booking, the  amount of Rs.1460/- charged at the time of booking had refunded to him as is evident from refund confirmation letter, Ex.C8 on 27.12.2015. By refunding the booking amount, it had discharged its liability and cannot be held to be deficient in providing services. 

7.       It may be stated here that the OP is engaged in business of hospitality  and ethically it was  its bounded duty to apprise about the booking status to its customers. However, in the present complaint, the OP failed to inform to the complainant about  the non confirmation of the booking of a room in the above said hotel. Had the OP informed the complainant in time, about the non confirmation of the booking, the complainant would not have left for Shimla and  the inconvenience caused to him could have been avoided. By not  informing about the booking status to the complainant in time,  the OP has committed deficiency in rendering services. No doubt the OP had refunded the booking amount of Rs.1460/- to the complainant but it does not absolve its liability to compensate the complainant for the inconvenience suffered by him. As such, we are  of the view that end of justice would be met if the OP shall pay  a lump sum amount  of Rs.6000/-to the complainant.

8.       In view of the aforesaid discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the OP to pay a sum of Rs.6000/- to the complainant with a period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of this order, failing which it shall pay interest @7% per annum on the said amount from the date of passing of his order till its realization.

ANNOUNCED

DATED:25.4.2018       

                                                                   NEENA SANDHU

                                                                       PRESIDENT

                                                                   NEELAM GUPTA

                                                                         MEMBER