Delhi

East Delhi

CC/90/2015

RAKESH - Complainant(s)

Versus

RELIANCE - Opp.Party(s)

27 Jan 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

C.C. NO. 90/15

 

Shri Rakesh Kumar Jain

R/o B-2/5, Mangla Apartment

I.P. Extension, Delhi – 110 092                                               ….Complainant

 

Vs.

 

Radiance Motel

Off: Tania Farm Complex, Satbari

Chhatterpur Mandir Road,

Chatterpur, New Delhi – 110 074                                                 ….Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 18.02.2015

Judgment Reserved on:27.01.2017

Judgment Passed on: 27.01.2017

 

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari  (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By : Shri Sukhdev Singh (President)

 

JUDGEMENT

The complainant Shri Rakesh Jain has filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against Radiance Motel (OP) for deficiency in services. 

2.        The facts in brief are that the complainant booked a lawn and pandal with AC on paying an advance booking amount of Rs. 81,000/- on 14.10.2014 vide receipt no. 014.  The lawn was under construction at the time of booking and the complainant was assured that the same will be ready for function in the month of November 2014.  On 07.12.2014, when he visited the venue, he found that the pandal was open and without AC.  The complainant met to the official of the respondent and discussed the same.  However, the complainant did not get any satisfactory reply.  He made a request for cancellation of booking and refund of deposit amount as his trust was broken. 

            He sent a SMS on 12.12.2014 for cancellation of booking and refund of deposit amount.  The complainant did not get any satisfactory reply.  He again sent a detailed mail on 22.01.2015, which was also not replied.  Thus, the complainant has stated that there was deficiency in service on the part of respondent.  Hence, he has claimed refund of booking amount of Rs. 81,000/- with 18% interest; compensation of     Rs. 10,000/- on account of harassment and mental agony alongwith cost of Rs. 25,000/- towards litigation.

3.        Notice of the complaint was given.  Vakalatnama was filed on their behalf, but they did not file any reply.  Hence, their right to file the WS was closed.

4.        In support of its complaint, the complainant has examined himself. He has deposed on affidavit.  He has narrated he facts, which have been stated in the complaint.  He has also placed on record receipt of dated 14.10.2014, whereby an amount of Rs. 81,000/- was deposited with Radiance Motel and email of dated 22.01.2015 asking for refund of advance money.

5.        We have heard Ld. Counsel for complainant and have perused the material placed on record.  Counsel for OP did not file any WS nor any evidence.  Even they did not put the appearance to argue the matter.  If a look is made to the testimony of the complainant which has gone unrebutted and the documents placed on record, it is evident that complainant have booked lawn for the marriage of his daughter and a booking amount of Rs. 81,000/- was paid vide receipt of dated 14.10.2014.  Alongwith the receipt, there has been booking letter, which show that advance will not be refundable in case of cancellation of the function.  The cancellation of the lawn has been done on account of non-providing of the facility, which was assured at the time of booking.  The lawn was under construction when it was said to be booked. 

The fact that the lawn could not be made functional for the purpose of function, which was to be held on 04.02.2015, the complainant was compelled to cancel the booking.  When the complainant was compelled to cancel the booking, certainly, there was deficiency of services.  When there was deficiency of services on the part of OP, certainly, the complainant was entitled for refund of booking amount.  Not only that when the cancellation have been done under compelling circumstances, the complainant has suffered mental pain and agony.

In view of the above, it is ordered that OP shall refund an amount of Rs. 81,000/- being the booking amount.  Further, they have to pay an amount of Rs. 20,000/- on account of compensation for mental pain and agony.   This includes the cost of litigation.  The awarded amount of Rs. 81,000/- and Rs. 20,000/- making a total of Rs. 1,01,000/- will carry 6% interest from the date of filing the complaint till its realization.  The order be complied within 45 days. 

Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                              (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

        Member                                                                        Member    

           

    (SUKHDEV SINGH)

          President