Delhi

New Delhi

CC/898/2014

Prity Jain - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. JUK ASO Resorts Pvt.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

01 Jul 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/898/14                     Dated:

In the matter of:

Prity Jain,

14/17, Shakti Nagar,

Delhi-110007

……..COMPLAINANT

       

VERSUS

1. Jukaso Resorts Pvt. Ltd.,

        Through its Director/A.R,

        Regd. Office at:

        49-50, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi-110003

 

2. Sh. Rajiv Khanna,
3. Sh. Malini Khanna,
4. Sh. Arshiya Kanna
5. Sh. Yajush Khanna

        All, Directors of M/s. Jukaso Resorts Pvt. Ltd.,

        B-9,  Diwan Shree Apartment,

        30, Feroz Shah Road, New Delhi-110001

                                         ……. OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

 

ORDER (Oral)

Date of Arguments: 01.07.2015

President: C.K Chaturvedi

Present:    Complainant in person.

                Counsel for the OP.

                Arguments heard.      

 

Complainant took a membership of OP by paying a sum of Rs.1,30,457/- payable in 9 easy installments of Rs.8,386/- through ECS. The OP started deducting amount by ECS of Rs.8,386/- also deducted to be amount of Rs.10,559/- two times. She having paid 25% of the membership became eligible for benefits of membership and requested to OP on 2.9.14 to book hotel in Shimla from 5^thOct.10 to 7^thOct.10. A mail was sent on email address of OP from regd. Email address of complainant which was acknowledged by confirming the request of booking on 03.09.14. She was informed the same and thereafter the OP had to reply with details. The OP never returned back. Complainant made repeated calls but no booking was confirmed, and she felt cheated. In these circumstances, she stopped further payment. Despite that payment from ECS continued to Company. Therefore she filed this complaint seeking apology from OP and to return the amount.

OP counsel is not able to show any email confirming the hotel reservation, whether the complainant was informed by email that the hotel was not available.

OP in fact during hearing admitted that hotel was not available.

We have considered the entire reply. OP committed deficiency in not providing whatever was promised to complainant by it after taking the entire amount. Rather they had deducted two installments more than what was agreed, which they had returned during the pendency of this case. 

We hold OP guilty of deficiency in services and direct OP to pay Rs.1,30,457/- with 9% interest from date of booking. We also award Rs.15,000/- as compensation and Rs.10,000/- for litigation expenses.

The order shall be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

 

        Pronounced in open Court on 01.07.2015.

 

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

 (Ritu Garodia)

MEMBER