DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II U.T. CHANDIGARH [Consumer Complaint Case No: 582 of 2011] -------------------------------- Date of Institution : 20.12.2011 Date of Decision : 16.10.2012 -------------------------------- Rajinder Singh, resident of #418, Milk Colony, Dhanas, Chandigarh. ---Complainant V E R S U S [1] Shaandar Tent and Caterers, #1505/1, Sector 29-B, Chandigarh, through its Partner Sh. Mohan Rangra. [2] Shaandar Tent and Caterers, #5197/3, Main Market, Modern Housing Complex, Near HDFC ATM, Mani Majra, Chandigarh, through its Partner Sh. Mohan Rangra (Deleted vide order dated 28.08.2012). ---Opposite Parties BEFORE: SH. LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT SH. JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU MEMBER Argued By: Sh. Gaurav Bhardwaj, Counsel for Complainant. Opposite Party No.1 Ex-parte. Opposite Party No.2 Deleted. PER JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU, MEMBER 1. Complainant has filed the present complaint, against the Opposite Parties on the ground that the Opposite Parties contacted the Complainant that he has booked the Community Centre, Sector 11, Chandigarh, for the marriage ceremony, on 20.11.2011, and as the Opposite Parties were engaged in the business of Catering, made a representation on 12.6.2011. After due negotiations, Complainant and the Opposite Parties settled the matter of providing the required services for Rs.1.85 lacs. An advance payment of Rs.5,000/- was made to the Opposite Parties, which is reflected on the booklet at Pg.8 (Annexure C-1). The Complainant even inquired about the manner in which the Opposite Parties would make the arrangements, to which the Opposite Parties claimed as the marriage season is about to begin, the Complainant would be able to see the different arrangements, made by the Opposite Parties, on different occasions; and on one such occasion, the Complainant was asked to visit the Community Centre, Sector 33, Chandigarh, to see the arrangements on 10.10.2011. But to the utter dismay of the Complainant, when the Complainant, along with his father, visited the site, on 11.10.2011, they were shocked to see the poor quality as well as management of the Opposite Parties. The Complainant feeling dissatisfied, asked the Opposite Parties, to refund his amount, as he intended to hire the services of some other caterer. Finally, the Complainant made up his mind, and took the services of other Caterer at a higher price, due to the rush of the marriage season. The Complainant claimed that he could not negotiate with the new caterer, due to the time constraints. The Complainant also claims that the Opposite Parties failed to refund the advance amount of Rs.5,000/-, even after repeated requests. The Complainant aggrieved of the act of the Opposite Parties served a legal notice, through his counsel, on 11.11.2011, which was cleverly avoided by the Opposite Parties. The copies of the legal notice and the postal receipts are annexed as Annexure C-2 to C-5 respectively. A copy of the wedding card of marriage solemnized in the family of the Complainant dated 20.11.2011 is annexed as Annexure C-6. Thus, the Complainant feeling aggrieved of the act of the Opposite Parties has preferred the present complaint, seeking the relief of refund of the amount of Rs.5,000/-, along with compensation of Rs.50,000/- for unfair trade practice, besides Rs.3300/- towards litigation expenses. The complaint of the complainants is duly supported by his detailed affidavit. 2. Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case. However, despite service, nobody has appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No.1, therefore, it was proceeded against exparte on 02.02.2012. 3. On a separate statement given by the learned counsel for the Complainant to the effect that he does not want to continue the present complaint against Opposite Party No.2, as Opposite Party No.2 and Opposite Party No.1 are the same persons; hence, the name of Opposite Party No. 2 was ordered to be deleted from the array of Opposite Parties vide order dated 28.08.2012. 4. Having gone through the entire complaint, version of the Complainant, the evidence of the Complainant, we have come to the following conclusions. 5. The fact that the Complainant took the services of the Opposite Party No.1 for making arrangements for catering during the wedding of his daughter, and an amount of Rs.5,000/- was paid as an advance, for this purpose, is established from document Annexure C-1 (Pg.8). That the Complainant in order to save himself from further suffering had changed the Caterer for the reason that he was not satisfied with the quality of the services which the Opposite Party No.1 claimed. The Complainant had claimed to have even visited the Community Centre, Sector 33, Chandigarh, to satisfy himself of the quality of the services provided by the Opposite Party No.1, but on not finding it to be of good quality, had preferred to not to continue with the contract, and as the very basis of the contract was subject to the Complainant’s satisfaction on his having seen the arrangements of other functions, hence, we feel that the Complainant has a right to recover the advance payment made to the Opposite Party No.1, which was as per the averments of the Complainant, conditional, to his satisfaction. 6. The Complainant had also registered his grievance with the Opposite Party No.1 by serving a legal notice, which was avoided by the Opposite Party No.1, thus, proving that the Opposite Party No.1 was willful in not addressing the request made by him about the refund of the advance amount of Rs.5,000/-paid by him, as well as other allegations mentioned in the legal notice. 7. Hence, the Complainant has clearly made out a case of deficiency in service against the Opposite Party No.1 and the present complaint deserves to succeed qua it. 8. In the light of above observations, we find a definite deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party No.1. Hence, the present complaint is allowed and the Opposite Party No.1 is directed to refund the advance amount of Rs.5,000/- to the Complainant. The Opposite Party No.1 is further directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the Complainant for causing mental harassment and agony, along with costs of litigation of Rs.3000/-. 9. The above said order shall be complied within 45 days of its receipt by Opposite Party No.1; thereafter, it shall be liable for an interest @18% per annum on the amount of Rs.15,000/-, from the date of institution of the present complaint i.e. 20.12.2011, till it is paid. 10. Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. Announced 16th October, 2012 Sd/- (LAKSHMAN SHARMA) PRESIDENT Sd/- (JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU) MEMBER ‘Dutt’
| | MR. JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT | , | |
