DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

C.C. No. 457/2022 

QUORUM:

Order By: Shri S.S. Malhotra (President)

JUDGMENT

By this order the Commission shall dispose off the present complaint filed by the Complainant against OP w.r.t. deficiency of service in not returning amount to the complainant for the services to be provided by the OP of his Banquet Hall.

1. Brief facts as stated by the complainant in the complaint are that the marriage of OP’s daughter was scheduled for 26.04.2020 and complainant approached the OP to book the said marriage hall for the said date and paid Rs.60,000/- in cash on 06.03.2020, Rs.1,20,000/- on 16.03.2020 by way of cheque however on account of COVID pandemic, complete lockdown was imposed in the last week of March 2020 and as such the marriage of the daughter of the complainant was postponed and was rescheduled for 30.05.2021.  The complainant again approached the OP on 23.01.2021 and paid Rs.25,000/- in cash and another amount of Rs.25,000/- in cash on 10.03.2021 and complainant paid a total sum of Rs.2,30,000/- in total for the purpose of booking the hall for the marriage of his daughter. However, on account of the second wave of covid pandemic there was another lockdown in the month of April 2021 and the booked banquet hall was closed as per the policy of the Government and complainant then visited the OP after the removal of lockdown but the banquet hall was found locked and he visited the another banquet of the OP at CBD Ground and requested the official of OP to book marriage hall in their another banquet hall but same was avoided on one account or the other and the OP have not refunded the amount given to the OP towards booking of the marriage hall and as such he served a legal notice on 01.08.2022 to the OP but the same was not replied and ultimately he filed the present complaint against OP thereby demanding Rs.2,30,000/- with interest, along with compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and litigation charges of Rs.5,000/-.
2. The document enclosed with the complaint towards payment made to the OP is in the nature of Form with the header estimate of Rs.60,000/- and another amount with the header ‘Estimate’ of Rs.25,000/- in the form of estimate are filed. Payment of Rs.1,20,000/- was made by way of cheque and also getting corroborating from the Passbook record of complainant. 
3. Notice was issued to the OP1 and OP2 as per amended Memo of Parties filed by the complainant. The OP1 did not receive the notice and same was received back with the report ‘unclaimed’. The service upon OP1 was deemed proper and OP2 was waited as period of 30 days had not expired by that time but the OP2 also did not appear even thereafter and was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 01.05.2024.
4. Complainant has filed his evidence by way of affidavit.
5. The Commission has heard the arguments and perused the record. 
6.  The Complainant has filed his passbook showing that he has made payment of Rs.120000/- by way of cheque and has filed the receipts stating to be the payment of Rs.60,000/-, Rs.25,000/- and Rs.25,000/-.

Although, the header of the said cash receipts mentions it as ‘Estimate’ but since OP has not turned up to file its reply on this aspect, the submission of the complainant along with evidence filed has gone unrebutted.

7. The Commission would have been in better position if the OP would have turned up or would have accepted or denied the said fact. Not only this the complainant has also issued a notice to the OP which has been duly served upon the OP but he has not filed sent a reply thereof to the complainant. Therefore, the contention of complainant is at better footing and is sufficient to draw presumption that complainant has paid Rs.230000/- to the OP  for availing the service of the banquet Hall of OP for the purpose of marriage of her daughter but  on account of covid pandemic the marriage could not be solemnized  nor the OP has provided the services of banquet hall to the complainant nor has returned the amount to the complainant.  It is evidently clear that the complainant has not cancelled the booking rather it was beyond the control of both the parties and in these circumstances when OP has not provided any service against the amount received by it, the same tentamounts to deficiency in providing the services by the OP. Therefore, the Commission hereby orders as follows:

• The OP would return Rs.230000/- to the complainant with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of each deposit, along with compensation of Rs.20,000/- and litigation charges of Rs.10,000/-. 

This order be complied with within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order and if the order is not complied within 30 days as ordered here-in-above, the OP would pay interest on all amount @ 12% p.a. from the date of each deposit till the actual payment is made.   

Copy of the order be supplied / sent to the parties free of cost as per rules.

File be consigned to Record Room. 

Announced on 03.04.2024.