MR LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI, PRESIDENT..The substance of the Complaint in brief is that, the Complainant for his fabrication works at his residence in Rayagada had hired an expert named Butu Maharana from Nabarangpur, and while at Nabarangpur, for accommodation he enquired from the website, and after getting the advertisement of the O.P. in the popular websites of “Goibibo”, ‘Yatra’etc. He got the telephone number of the O.P. and contacted over phone on the night of 14.06.2016, if one room for one person could be available in the morning of 15.06.2016, and on assurance of the O.P. he deputed his workmen Mr.Maharana to the Hotel in Rayagada at about 5.00 AM of dt.15.06.2016 who on paying Rs.600/- which is acknowledged vide receipt No. 441 of O.P. was made enter into a single room. But the room was unclean, bath and toilet were stinking, bed sheet was dirty, food stuffs are found thrown throughout the room, swamped with red ants and cockroaches. He immediately reported the same to the man on the desk of reception to clean the room or provide another room, but the man in the reception assured that, the attendants have not yet reported to the duty, and after their resumption the room will be clean. But till 9.30 am of the day, the room was not cleaned, the occupant mr Maharana as complained, surprisingly the man in the reception told that, the room is made clean, Mr maharana immediately made the man to visit the room, and the man expressed his helplessness, and on call from Mr.Maharana, the Complainant himself appeared in the Hotel and asked the receptionist to refund the money cancelling the booking if the hotel is unable to provide service as required, the man simply refused. He did not refunded the money for booking nor provided a clean room. Hence disgust the Workman Mr Maharana left the hotel, and stayed in another. It is submitted that for such unfair trade practice ,rude behaviour of the O.P. the workmen got disturbed mentally, and could not finish his job in time, and took another day, for which the benefactor of his service, the present complainant had to bear heavy financial loss, mental agony for which he has filed this complaint praying to allow with heavy compensation against the O.P. including cost.
02. The Complainant has filed the copy of the booking receipt and certain other document. Considered.
03. The O.P. entered his appearance on dt.26.07.2016 to contend that, their hotel is not registered with any online platforms like goibibo or yatra nor the complainant himself ever appeared to book any room with the O.P. hence he is not a consumer and lacks territorial jurisdiction to file the Complaint herein Nabarangpur Forum. He expresses surprise, as admittedly he has not booked the room, how he could be present at the hotel. He stated that, the Complainant is not a consumer or has not received any service within the meaning of 2(1)b or 2(1)d of CP Act1986. Hence he prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
04. The O.P. except the counter did not provide us any other document in support of his contentions.
05. The primary contention of the O.P. is that, cause of action did never arise at Nabarangpur, as the hotel booking was never provided through any online platforms like goibibo or yatra.com. The Complainant on the other hand has provide us copies of online advertisement for the Hotel of O.P. in online platforms like www.travelguru.com, trip advisor, www.agoda.com and www.yatra.com through which the O.P. has invited customers to book rooms online. The Complainant further show us demo how to book the rooms of the Hotel of O.P. online. Hence we are convinced that, the O.P. hotel is advertised online inviting customers from far and wide, and it is not surprising that, the Complainant has got contact numbers of O.P. from these online platforms and contacted the O.P. over phone for reservation of room.
06. The next contention of the O.P. that, as the Complainant has not reserved the room nor he stayed there or paid for it, he could not be consumer. The Complainant submits that, he had got the workman Mr Maharana hired for fabrication works to be done in his house at Rayagada, and as the man from Nabarangpur coming to Rayagada staying there in a hotel, all the expenses is borne by the Complainant, and each of his penny spent on Mr.Maharana is the price of the work done. Further any service provided to Mr. Maharana during his visit to Rayagada on dt.15.06.2016 is directly affecting his skills and service to the Complainant. The unfair trade practice and deficiency in service provided by the O.P. to Mr. Maharana directly caused loss to the Complainant who is the potential user of the skill of the workman. Hence, though the Bitu Maharana had occupied the room, the payment was done by the Complainant, and he is the Consumer.
07. We have referred to the provisions of Section 2(o) of the C.P.Act-1986 definition section defines it as under:
"service' means service of any description which is made available to potential users and includes the provision of facilities in connection with banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, board or lodging or both, housing construction, entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal service;"
08. It is in two parts. The main part is followed by inclusive clause and ends by exclusionary clause. The main clause itself is very wide. It applies to any service made available to potential users. The words 'any' and 'potential' are significant. Both are of wide amplitude. Their ambit is further enlarged by use of inclusive clause. It is not only purchaser of goods or hirer of services but even those who use the goods or who are beneficiaries of services with approval of the person who purchased the goods or who hired services are included in it. The legislature has taken precaution not only to define 'complaint', complainant', 'consumer' but even to mention in detail what would amount to unfair trade practice by giving an elaborate definition in clause (r) and even to define 'defect' and 'deficiency' by clauses (f) and (g) for which a consumer can approach the Commission. The Act thus aims to protect the economic interest of a consumer as understood in commercial sense as a purchaser of goods and in the larger sense of user of services. The common characteristics of goods and services are that they are supplied at a price to cover the costs and generate profit or income for the seller of goods or provider of services. But the defect in one and deficiency in other may have to be removed and compensated differently. The former is, normally, capable of being replaced and repaired whereas the other may be required to be compensated by award of the just equivalent of the value or damages for loss.
09. Hence, in our view, as the service to be provided to the occupant Mr.Maharana was directly beneficial to the present Complainant, he has rightly instituted the Complainant, and the O.P. having failed to provide right service for the money he has received is deficient in service and is bound to compensate the Complainant.
As thus the Complaint is allowed against the O.P.
ORDER
i. The O.P. is hereby directed to pay the Complainant the advance for booking the room i.e. Rs.600/- including a sum of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand)as compensation and further a cost of Rs.5,000/- for all such mental agony financial loss they have inflicted on the complainant through thorough unfair and arbitrary actions as discussed above.
iii. The above direction shall be complied with in 30 days of this order, failing which, the total sum will bear 12% interest per annum till its realization. Pronounced on 3oth day of December' 2016.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT, DCDRF,
NABARANGPUR
