District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No.557/2021.
Date of Institution: 27.10.2021.
Date of Order: 23.08.2021.
Manuj Kaushik S/o Lt. Shri Dinesh Kumar Kaushik R/o 16-D, Madhur Apartments, Inder Enclave, Mianwali Nagar, Paschim Vihar, Near Richmond Global School, New Delhi – 110 087.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. Radisson Blu Hotel Faridabad through Mr. Harpreet Vohra, Cluser General Manager/General Manager, Delhi-NCR, Radisson Hotel Group/Radisson Blu Hotel Faridabad. Add:- Sector-20B, Mathura Road, Faridabad, Haryana. Email:delhireservationscentre@radissonhotels.com.general.manager@ rdfaridabad.com.
2. Mr. Pariyam Singh/Priyuam Singh, Duty Manager/Front Office, Radisson Blu Hotel Faridabad. Add:- Sector:20-B, Mathura Road, Faridabad Haryana, E-mail: th floor, EROS Corporate Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110 019. Email :- info@eros-group.com;sales@eros-group.com.
…Opposite parties……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
PRESENT: Sh. Gautem Narayan Singh and Sh. Aman Garg counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Bhagat Singh, counsel for opposite parties Nos.1 to 3.
Opposite party No.4 exparte vide order dated 16.03.2022.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that on 15th September,
2021, while coming from Jalandhar, Punjab where complainant appeared before the Court of Ld. District & Sessions Judge, booked one room on single occupancy for one night stay at opposite party’s hotel situated at Faridabad through mobile App of Radission Blu Hotels a son 16.09.2021 complainant had to appear before Hon’ble District & Sessions Court, Faridabad. The complainant arrived at the hotel on 15.09.2021 at 20:45p.m. Pertinently, the said room was booked after the deduction of Rs.10,000/- loyalty points alongwith Rs.2407.69/- including statutory taxes which were duly secured by the credit card details of complainant which were pre-filled on the app before the room was booked and confirmed. However, despite the deduction of loyalty points and securing the payment inclusive of statutory taxes, the opposite party’s staff forcefully made the complainant to deposit another Rs.5500/-. The complainant found that unusual and unethical as points had been deducted and amount had been secured asked the opposite party’s staff why additional amount must be deposited but citing the hotel policy staff asked that room should be provided subject to depositing the additional amount only. After a short span of rest, the complainant went out form the hotel at around 11:00pm to have dinner outside. At around 12:30 am the complainant returned to the hotel with his shoulder bag which contained one bottle of self purchased remaining liquor. The hotel security after checking/scanning the bag through it’s Deputy Manager namely Mr. Pariyam/Priyam Singh approached the complainant at the reception area and asked in the most derogatory and insulting manner before other hotel staff to deposit Rs.1000/- more or to give consent to deduct the same from the amount already secured towards cover charges for carrying own liquor bottle. The complainant requested the staff that he was a Radisson Group Member and was having a room booked for which adequate consideration had been taken wherein he was having all rights to use his private booked room as per his convenience which nowhere affects the room nor its articles in any manner and neither does it deteriorates the hotel property. But opposite party NO.2 while citing the so-called hotel policy restrained, manhandled and misbehaved with the complainant for going towards his room through himself and security officials. Importantly, the complainant repeatedly requested the opposite party’s to allow him to go to his room to sleep as he had to attend urgent work tomorrow and also that he was exhausted and tired due to long journey, but to utter shock opposite party’s were so adamant for depositing Rs.1000/- more or to give consent to deduct the same form the amount already secured, towards cover charges. The opposite party’s made the complainant sit at the reception area late till midnight. Thereafter, owing to apprehension that opposite parties Nos.2 & 3 might adopt wrongful restrain and might use criminal force and/or assault against complainant, complainant dialed emergency No.100 to seek local police’s assistance and help and it was only after the intervention of the local police that the complainant went to his room late at midnight. Importantly, in the presence of police officials the complainant asked for the copy of hotel policy quoting which they were charging illegally and unjustly to which the opposite parties Nos.2 & 3 at the behest of opposite parties Nos.1 & 4 expressly refused and instead asked the complainant to get the copy from opposite party No.4 situated at Nehru Plac e, Delhi. In this rgard it was further submitted that opposite parties Nos. 2 & 3 were working and acting at behest of opposite parties Nos.1 & 4 and hence all were having direct nexus collusion with each other in day to day affairs and management of hotel. Therefore, to any extent and imagination it could not be presumed that opposite parties 1,2 &3 did not possess the hotel policy in official record. The aforesaid act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to:
a) pay damages/compensation to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/- for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs. 50,000 /-as litigation expenses and to refund compensatory Rs.50,000/- loyalty points in the account of the complainant.
2. Opposite parties Nos.1 to 3 put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite parties Nos.1 to 3 refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that the complainant had suppressed the true material facts from this Hon’ble Commission. In fact, the complainant made an online booking form the website of opposite parties and booked a room with the opposite party No.1 for one night stay at Faridabad. As per the booking, the complainant came to hotel on 15.09.2021 at around 2045p.m. and asked the receptionist for check in. At the reception area, the complainant was requested to fill up the registration card alongwith Covid-19 declaration form and one of the associate of opposite parties namely Mr. Shivam Bhardwaj provided information about the hotel and also explained the complainant about the hotel policies. The complainant was also informed about the outside food & liquor policy of the hotel. Thereafter the complainant furnished the necessary details, as require din registration form and Covid-19 declaration and finally after understanding and accepting the terms and conditions provide din the registration form, the complainant had signed the registration form, submitted it at caption and went inside his room. At around 00.00 hours, the complainant went outside the hotel premises and came back to hotel at around 00.45 had alongwith a bottle of liquor in hand. On seeing this, the Duty Manager namely Mr. Parinay i.e opposite party No.2 , in a very polite manner again informed the complainant about the ‘outside food & liquor policy’ of the hotel but the complainant shouted on him and told in a very rude and arrogant manner that ‘he had not seen such policy in any other hotel’. Opposite party No.2 tried to explain the complainant and also offered him for a cover charge of INR 1000/-, if he wants to take the bottle inside the room. Opposite party No.2 told the complainant that he could use this amount for ordering the food from hotel but the complainant became more angry and again shouted on the staff saying that “he wants to see the hotel policy immediately. On this the complainant was shown his registration card, in which it was clearly mentioned that “food and drinks purchase outside the hotel were not allowed, but the complainant threw it aside saying that ‘he was an Advocate and did not accept these terms and conditions of hotel. The complainant was adamant on his point and told that he wanted to see the court order or any law in this regard. When the hotel staff expressed their inability to show any such court order, the complainant started making ruckus. The complainant created a nuisance in front of other customers for around 45 minutes and misbehaved with hotel staff. In order to spoil the image of the hotel, the complainant also gathered the public outside the hotel and called the police on spot. At around 01-45 hrs. two policemen reached at hotel and they talked to opposite party No.2 and the complainant regarding the whole incident. Opposite party No.3 namely Mr. Shashi Shankar was also called on spot and he also tried to explain the complainant regarding hotel policies. Thus after a long conversation between the complainant, hotel staff and cops, the complainant calmed down and accepted the hotel polices. Finally the complainant paid an amount of Rs.1000/- as a cover charge and went inside his room. The complainant also used this amount for ordering food form in room dining. Thus in view of the above said facts, it was clear that the opposite parties never harassed, exploited the complainant in any manner nor his rights and liberty were restrained/restricted by the opposite parties in any manner. Opposite parties Nos. 1 to 3 denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties– Radission Blue Hotel Faridabad etc. with the prayer to: a) pay damages/compensation to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/- for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 50,000 /-as litigation expenses and to refund compensatory Rs.50,000/- loyalty points in the account of the complainant.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Manuj Kaushik,, Ex.CW1/1 (colly) – email dated 15.09.2021,, Ex.CW1/2 – email dated 16.9.2021., Ex.CW1/3 – invoice,, Ex.CW1/4 – bill
On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties strongly agitated
and opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite parties, ex.RW1/A – affidavit of Shashi Shankar, Manager, of Radisson Blu Hotel Faridabad, Sector-20B, Mathura Road,, Ex.RW1/1 – letter of authorization,, Ex.RW1/2 – Registration card,, Ex.RW1/3 - Self Reporting form to be filled by all domestic travelers, Ex.RW1/5 – copy of invoice,, Ex. RW1/6 – copy of invoice,, Ex.RW1/7 – payment receipt
6. It is evident from Guest Registration Card vide Ex.RW1/2 in which it has been mentioned in terms and conditions at Sl No.7 that “Food and drinks purchased outside this premise are not allowed.” It is also evident from invoice dated 16.09.2021 for Rs. 1027/- vide Ex. RW1/6 the complainant used this amount for ordering food from in room dining.
7. After going through the evidence led by the parties, the Commission is of the opinion that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party has been proved. Hence, the complaint is dismissed. Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 23.08.2022 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
