Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 699.
Instituted on : 19.12.2019.
Decided on : 10.05.2022.
Parveen Kumar age 35 years s/o Sh. Rajvir Singh R/o village-Imligath, Teh. Meham, Distt. Rohtak(Haryana).
……….………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Oyo Rooms Office, Office Address: Oravel Stays Private Ltd., Unit-325, B-2 Tower, Spaze1-Tech Park, Sohna Road, Sector-49, Gurugram-122002, Haryana, Through its concern official.
- Hotel Shiv Vilas Palace, Address: N.H.-11, Saras Chauraha, Agra Road, Bharatpur((Raj.) Pin Code-321001, Through its concern official.
- HDFC Bank Ltd., Branch Office, Kranti Chowk, near Gohana Chowk-Mor, Meham, Distt. Rohtak.
..…….……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.SHYAM LAL, MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Sachin Suhag, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Himanshu Arora, Advocate for the opposite party No.1.
Sh.A.K.Jain and Sh. Rajesh Sharma, Advocate for opposite
party No.3.
Opposite party No.2 exparte.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant alongwith his family visited Bharatpur, Rajastan as family tour and for that he booked a room in Hotel Shiv Vilas Palace at Bharatpur, Rajasthan on 05.12.2019 through official website of Oyo Rooms Booking site. The complainant got text and whatsapp messages on his mobile confirming booking with booking number MXIA0239 dated 05.12.2019. Complainant received another message from Oyo regarding payment of Rs.1507/- for confirmation of room and for this complainant online transferred the amount of Rs.1507/- through his debit card of HDFC Bank. After confirmation of amount paid by the complainant, Oyo official website booked the room. Complainant on the same day at about 6.00p.m. reached the hotel with his family and contacted Reception Manager for confirming booking of room in their hotel in the name of Mr. Parveen Kumar but the reception manager told that there is no booking in his name. Complainant made a call to the official number provided in booking confirmation message which was picked up by Mr. Rakshit Devrani and he told that as per their official website the room booking in that hotel was confirmed but now he could not solve the problem and the complainant had to try to book another room in nearby property. The complainant asked the Manager to book an another room of the hotel and he told that the complainant should pay Rs.3000/- for confirming the room. Complainant felt cheated by Oyo rooms official site and also by the hotel manager for double charges of the same room. The complainant tried to book another hotels but as the city was unknown, it was late night and, complainant alongwith his family felt unsafe in the unknown places. The complainant again visited hotel Shiv Vilas Palace and booked his room by paying Rs.3000/- in cash to the hotel. The complainant was cheated by the opposite parties in collusion with each other. The act and conduct of the opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to refund the rent of Rs.1507/- and Rs.3000/- paid by the complainant and also to pay Rs.70000/- for causing harassment, mental and physical suffering to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party No.1 in its reply has submitted that complainant had booked one room from 05.12.2019 to 06.12.2019 via booking ID MXIA0239 but it is wrong on the part of complainant to suggest that the hotel owner refused to provide room to complainant. Further the complainant is deliberately suppressing the material facts in order to accommodate his side of story. It was the complainant who did not confirm his arrival on time pertaining to his arrival, which is a necessity as per booking policy of the opposite party No.1. As per general terms and conditions of guest booking policy:
“Guests may be contacted closer to their check-in date to confirm the arrival status or arrival time through calls or messages. In case, we do not receive a response from the guest after multiple attempts, the booking may be put on hold or cancelled. In case of availability, OYO will try to reinstate your booking when you contact us back or make a payment through our multitude of payment options.”
All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of compliant with costs.
3. Opposite party No.2 in its reply has submitted that the relationship/franchise of the opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 came to end much prior to the said alleged booking. Further, no booking was ever received and/or confirmed by the answering opposite party and as such the answering opposite party cannot be held liable for any amount received by opposite party no.1 in the grab of rendering services of the opposite party No.1.. However, as regards the denial of booking with the hotel and charge of Rs.3000/- per room are concerned, the same are replied in terms that as no relationship between the OYO Rooms office and the Hotel Shiv Vilas Palace persisted on the day of incident and as such the Hotel could not have allowed entry to the complainant in the hotel. Further the hotel conveyed the hotel charge applicable on the said date. However, after filing the reply, opposite party No.2 did not appear and was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 14.02.2022 of this Commission.
4. Opposite party No.3 in its reply has submitted that the present complaint has been presented in this Hon’ble Fourm does not disclose any cause of action against the opposite party No.3 and as such deserves dismissal with cost. There is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.3 and as such, the present complaint is not maintainable.
5. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C7 and has closed his evidence on dated 18.03.2020. Ld. counsel for the opposite party No.1 has tendered affidavit Ex.OPW1, documents Ex.OPW1/A to Ex.OPW1/D and closed his evidence on 19.02.2021. Ld. counsel for opposite party No.3 made a statement that reply already filed on behalf of opposite party no.3 be read in evidence and closed his evidence on
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the written arguments filed by opposite parties and material aspects of the case very carefully.
7. As per messages Ex.C1, complainant had deposited Rs.1507/- towards Oyo rooms through his debit card on 05.12.2019 on account of booking of a room at Hotel Shiv Vilas Palace. But as per email Ex.C2 & Ex.C3, it is admitted by the opposite party that complainant has faced trouble due to Check in denied by the opposite party in the hotel. Ex.C4 is the receipt in the name of complainant on account of shifting as owner denied check in. Ex.C6 is the voucher dated 06.12.2019 of Rs.3000/-, which is for the booking of room. Ex.C5 is a message received by the complainant from the Oyorooms, as per which they have submitted that: “We are extremely sorry that your stay experience with us was not as expected. We are investigating the matter. We hope you will give us another chance to host you”. It is also observed that as per Ex.OPW1/D the booking made by complainant through booking Id MXIA0239 has been cancelled. From the alleged documents it is proved that check in was denied by the opposite party No.2, due to which the complainant had to again book another room at the spot by giving Rs.3000/- i.e. by paying extra charges for the same as the earlier booking was only for Rs.1507/-. No doubt, as per the opposite party No.1, they have refunded the amount of Rs.1507/- to the complainant but the fact remains that the complainant had to pay Rs.1493/- in excess for booking the another room in same hotel. The booking of room was made by the complainant through opposite party no.1 and it was the duty of opposite party no.1 to made available the booked room to the complainant or if another room was provided then no excess amount should have been charged from the complainant. As such there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.1 and opposite party no.1 is liable to refund the extra amount charged from the complainant alongwith compensation.
8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party No.1 to refund the amount of Rs.1493/-(Rupees one thousand four hundred and ninety three only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 19.12.2019 till its realization and shall also pay Rs.10000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.3000/-(Rupees three thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision.
9. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
10.05.2022.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
…………………………..
Shyam Lal, Member
