This case has arisen out of an application U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
The case of the complainant is that the complainant booked one room in the hotel, namely, Capital O 9455 Milost through OYO Hotels & Homes Company i.e O.P.No:1 vide Booking ID QU4G1529 for 27.08.2022 to 28.08.2022 and paid Rs.873/- in advance from the account his bank bearing No:0492010021018 maintained with Punjab National Bank as the complainant planned for a honeymoon trip to Darjeeling with his wife.
As per booking the complainant along with his wife reached at Darjeeling on 27.08.2022 & contact to Manager of the O.P.No:2 regarding booking of said room then the O.P.No:2 told that there is no booking of room for complainant. The complainant asked the Manager of the hotel i.e O.P.No:2 to see their record regarding money sent through online, but the Manager did not give any satisfactory reply and refused to give room in the said hotel. After that the complainant called the Customer Care of O.P.No:1 regarding his booking but the O.P.No:1 expressed their inability & discontinued the phone call.
Having no alternative way the complainant requested the O.P.No:2 to manage a room in the hotel but the Manager said the all rooms has been already booked.
After this incident the complainant along with his wife suffered harassment due to non availability of the said room in the hotel of O.P.No:2, as per booking & came on the road and they were compelled to book in another hotel room and lastly they got a room by paying of Rs.1,300/-. The complainant contacted with the O.Ps regarding the refund of his paid money but till the filing of this case he has not get any refund of money.
The complainant filed a complaint regarding harassment against the O.Ps by online to the Grievance Department, they suggested to file this complaint before the Consumer Commission. Due to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice by the O.Ps the complainant lodged this complaint with prayer for directing the O.Ps to pay the refund of deducted amount for room booking amounting to Rs.873/-, compensation of Rs.35,00,000/- for harassment & mental pain and agony, also the litigation cost of Rs.25,000/-.
O.P.No:1 did neither appear nor contest the case.
O.P.No:2 entered appearance and contested the case by filing W.V stating that the complainant came to the hotel of the O.P.No:2 with his wife on August 27, 2022 & after disclosing the fact of having booking for a room till August 28, 2022 through the O.P.No:1, was duly allotted room No:205 by the Manager of the hotel. The complainant and his wife was requested to see the room before completing the rest of the check-in formalities. After seeing room No:205 the complainant & his wife complained about the size of the room and requested the Manager of the hotel to change the room and allot them a bigger room. The Manager of the hotel explained to the complainant & his wife that the rental which the complainant had paid is Rs.873/- for the room for 01 night was for the particular room which was allotted to him and bigger rooms in the hotel were costly. The Manager also stated that the hotel was entirely full and even if the complainant paid for a bigger room, no alternative accommodation was possible to be provided to him. Hearing the aforesaid the complainant asked the Manager at the Reception to cancel the booking and for refund of Rs.873/-, the Manager explained the booking can be cancelled by the complainant himself only through the O.P.No:1 and full refund shall be guided by the terms & conditions for cancellation of the O.P.No:1.
The O.P.No:2 also stated that since the complainant did not cancel his booking for the room, the system of the hotel automatically checked- in and checked-out on the subsequent date, a printout from the system whereof is annexed thereto and marked ‘A’.
The O.P.No:2 had no discussion at all with the complainant with regard to the refund of the amount of Rs.873/- or any amount at all for that matter. The amount of Rs.873/- could not have been refunded to the complainant since terms & conditions of refund does not allow such refund & it prays for dismissal of complaint with cost.
Point for consideration is:-
- Whether there was any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the O.Ps which gives rise cause of action to file the complaint and the complainant is entitled to get the claim?
D e c i s i o n w i t h r e a s o n s
The complainant in order to prove his complaint has furnished his affidavit in which he has deposed and reiterated all the averments made in the complaint. He has furnished the copy of receipt of Rs.873/- to OYO Hotels & Homes paid via Razorpay by UPI Transaction ID 223827368571 from the account, namely, Deepak Soni (Punjab National Bank) and the Google Transaction ID CICAgJCkp6j9JQ & a copy of email regarding confirmation of booking & a invoice/bill (xerox copy) of Magnolia Residency, Darjeeling & also xerox copy of statement of account of Punjab National Bank in the name of Deepak Soni.
It is proved from the evidence of complainant that the complainant had booked 01 room in hotel, namely, Milost, Darjeeling through online vide booking ID QU4G1529 for 01 i.e for 27.08.2022 to 28.08.2022 day and paid Rs.873/- in advance from the account of his bank account.
On the other hand O.P.No:2 adduced evidence & filed the document as Annexure-A which shows that the complainant was allotted 01 room bearing No:205(DELUX) for the date of 27th August, 2022 to 28th August, 2022, so the claim by the complainant for not allotting the room by the O.P.No:2 on that date is false. The Room No:205 was allotted to the complainant by the O.P.No:2 on 27.08.2022 but why the complainant and his wife on that day had booked another hotel, the reason best known to the complainant. The O.P.No:2 also submit a copy of guest policy for OYO Hotels & Homes in India, which shows that once a complainant had booked the room at the hotel of the O.P.No:2 through the O.P.No:1 after making a conscious decision after seeing the pictures of the hotel the rooms and all the facilities of the hotel and after reading all the reviews of the past boarders he willfully made himself amenable to the terms and conditions of such booking, stay, requirement of check-in, payment and cancellation & terms and conditions during stay in the property of the O.P.No:2, there is no scope of avoiding such terms & conditions.
In view of above & under above facts and discussion, we are of the considered view that there was no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P.No;2 and there was no cause of action to file this complaint and the present complaint against the O.P.No:2 is not maintainable in this Commission and the complainant thus not entitled to get relief as prayed for.
In the result the case fails.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
that the C.C-72/2022 be and the same is dismissed on contest against the O.P.No:2 and ex-parte against the O.P.No:1 but without any cost.
However, complainant may get refund Rs.873/-(Booking amount) from O.P.No:1 as per terms & condition of cancellation policy.
Let a copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.
