BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 08^TH DAY OF JULY 2022

ORDER

KUM.RENUKADEVI DESHPANDE, MEMBER

1. This  complaint has been  filed  complainant under section 35 of C.P.Act, 2019(herein after referred as “ACT”) against OPs  with prayer to

1. Direct the opposite parties  to refund rs.50,000/- along with interest 18% p.a. from 18.01.2022 till realization of the amount.
2. Such other  or direction as this  Hon’ble Commissin deem fit to pass in the circumstances of the case.

2.The brief facts of the complaint is as follows:

The complainant booked the OP choultry for the purpose of his daughters marriage to be held on 03.03.2022  & 04.03.2022. The complainant has paid Rs.50,000/- to the Ops on 10.01.2022 through cheque of Canara Bank  of Chandra Layout branch, Bengaluru. The OP has issued receipt for the advance amount. Total rent amount was Rs.65,000/- for two days. The complainant has agreed to pay balance amount of Rs.15,000/- by cash on 15.02.2022. Immediately after choultry was booked the government of Karnataka issued notification restricting the participation of friends and relatives in the marriage function hall  upto 100 people and also due to corona pandemic reason the members of the complainant family have decided to postpone the marriage date. Immediately, he called upon OP and also met him personally and explained the situation and demanded to return the advance amount of Rs.50,000/- given at the  time of booking the choultry. The OP has promised that in the event  if the function is cancelled the chouldtry will pay entire  advance without deducting any amount.  When the complainant  made the OP by demanding to return of the advance amount that time he was informed by OP but they are not ready to pay the amount. However, the OP agreed to adjust the amount in the event of marriage date has changed in the future dates, but since the complainant’s family has taken the decision not to celebrate the marriage function due to Corona pandemic reason. Therefore, he demanded for reimbursement of entire amount. The complainant has also issued notice  to the OP calling them to  return an advance amount, but  after having received notice the OP has not replied nor come forward to reimbursement the advance amount. The OPs have not replied to the legal notice. Hence, complainant alleges deficiency of service against OP. Hence, this complaint is filed.

3. The complainant filed application under order I Rule 10 of CPC for impleading the Proprietor of Swayam Prabha Kalyana Mantap as party to the proceedings. Heard. Perused. The reasons are accepted. He also files application under order VI Rule 17 of CPC. Reasons accepted. Both IA’s is allowed. The complainant was permitted to amend the cause title in the complaint. The complainant filed amended application.

4. After  admitting complaint, notice was issued,  OPs did not appear and OPs were placed exparte. The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence and produced documents in support of their case and marked Exhibits P1 to P5.

5. Heard  the counsel for complainant.

6. On the basis of pleading of the complainant the  following points arise for our consideration:-

1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service on the part of OP, if so complainant is entitled for relief sought for?
2. What order?

7. Our answer to the above points are as under:

Point No.1:- Affirmative in part.

Point no.2:- As per the final order.

REASONS

8. Point No.1: On perusal of pleadings in the complaint filed by the complainant  and documents and evidence placed on record, though the notice has been duly served on OP. Despite service of notice, OPs fails to appear and placed exparte. Under such exparte and non filing of version and  the OP have been admitted the claim of the complainant in the light of the decision 2018(1)CPR 314(NC) in the case of M/s Singla Builders and promoters V/s  Aman kumar Gurg.

9. To  expose of the falsity of the contents  of the complaint, the OPs did not file version. Hence, this commission has no option to  go except to consider the claim of the complainant. The complainant  to substantiate his case has specifically stated that the complainant has took the OP choultry for the purpose of his daughters marriage to be held on 3 & 4^th March 2022. The Complainant paid sum of Rs.50,000/- to the OP on 10.01.2022 through cheque drawn in Canara Bank, Chanda layout branch, Bengaluru. Total rent was fixed at Rs.65,000/- for 02 days i.e. 3 & 4^th March 2022, but immediately after choultry  was booked the government of Karnataka  has issued notice restricting the participants, friends and relatives in the marriage function into the marriage hall upto 100 people and also due to corona pandemic disease the members of the complainant family cancelled the marriage date. The complainant personally met the OPs and personally explained the situation and demanded for return of entire advance amount of Rs.50,000/-, but OPs are not ready to return the amount. However, the OPs have agreed to adjust the amount in the event of the marriage date is changed in future date. The complainant’s family have taken decision not to celebrate the marriage function due to corona pandemic. Therefore, he demanded to reimburse entire advance amount and complainant also issued legal notice to the OPs and postal receipts exhibit-P4, but after receipt of demand notice issued by the complainant the OPs have not ready to return the amount. It appears OPs have committed deficiency of service that held that Apathy and false promises means untrade practice. The complainant also filed affidavit evidence with documents  marked as Exhibits P1 to P5 for prove of his case.
10. With reference to above reasons, we come to the conclusion that there is deficiency of  service on the part of OPs much less untrade practice committed by OPs. Even though OPs would met miscellaneous expenses for choultry i.e. cleaning of choultry, electricity bills etc. 10%  deducted in the advance amount of Rs.5000/- remaining Rs.45,000/- shall be refunded with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. by way of compensation with litigation case of Rs.3000/-. Accordingly, we answer the point-1 partly in the affirmative.

11. Point no.2:-.  Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following

O R D E R

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. The OP shall refund Rs.45,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. as compensation to the complainant  from 04.02.2021 to till realization and pay Rs.3,000/- towards cost of litigation  to the complainant.
3. The OPs  shall comply this order within 60  days from this date, failing which the OP shall pay interest  at 10% p.a. on Rs.45,000/- after expiry of 60 days from this date till payment.
4. Furnish the copy of this order to both the parties and return extra copies of pleadings and documents.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 8^thday of July, 2022)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1 : Nil