Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/43/2018

Venkatachalam Krishnan s/o.Mr.Venkatachalam - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager shrivaare venkataachalapathi palace a Unit of Sri mak & co - Opp.Party(s)

S.G.Thyagarajan

23 Jun 2022

ORDER

Complaint presented on :21.12.2017 Date of disposal            :29.06.2022

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (NORTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.

 

                PRESENT : THIRU. G. VINOBHA, M.A., B.L.,                          :PRESIDENT

                                      THIRU.V.RAMAMURTHY,B.A.,B.L.,PGDLA.,   :MEMBER-II

 

C.C. No.43/2018

 

DATED THE WEDNESDAY  29^th  DAY OF JUNE 2022

 

Venkatachalam Krishnan

S/o.Mr.Venkatachalam,

No.44, Gandhi Salai,

Venus Nagar, Kolathur,

Chennai-600 099.                                                                    …..Complainant

 

 

 ..Vs..

 

The Manager,

Shirvaaru Venkataachalapathi Palace,

A Unit of Sri MAK & Co,

LBR Gardens, Adayalampattu,

Vanagaram, Ambattur Estate Road,

Chennai-600 029.                                                                   …..Opposite Party

 

 

Counsel for Complainant                          : M/s. G.Thiyagarajan and 4 others

 

Counsel for  opposite party                        : M/s. Pass Asscociates.

 

 

 

 

 

ORDER

 

THIRU.V.RAMAMURTHY,B.A.,B.L.,PGDLA.,   :MEMBER-II

 

        This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to direct the opposite party to pay back the caution deposit amount of Rs.6,32,500/- with 18% interest from the date of payment i.e.28.07.2016 and to direct the opposite party to compensate the complainant for the physical, mental, and financial loss indicted by the opposite party for restricted the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with the applicable interest and to pay the amount of Rs.25,000/- towards costs of legal notice and other expenses and to pay the cost of this complaint.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The complainant submitted that he had planned to solemnize the marriage of his son on 01.05.2017 and for the said purpose he booked the opposite party marriage hall in vanagaram, ambattur estate road, chennai on 28.07.2016.  The complainant submitted that he had paid the advance amount as security deposit for the marriage hall for a sum of Rs.6,32,500/-  on 28.07.2016.  The complainant submitted that unfortunately the proposed marriage of his son could not take place.  Hence the complainant has cancelled the booking of the opposite party marriage hall on 10.02.2017 which is about 79 days in advance from the date of the scheduled marriage.  The complainant submitted that he had made a written request dated 10.02.2017 to the manager of the opposite party marriage hall with regard to the cancellation of marriage and requested them to refund the caution deposit amount of Rs. 6,32,500/- whereas the opposite party is trying to cheat by not refunding the amount, instead gave evasive and insane replies to the complainant on his personal approach.  Further the complainant was ill-treated and also the opposite party authorities stated that the complainant will not get any amount refunded from them even if he approaches any form of law.  The complainant sent a legal notice through his counsel to the opposite party on 04.09.2017 whereas the said notice was returned with the endorsement ‘Refused’ and when several attempts of the complainant to get back the caution deposit of Rs.6,32,500/- from the opposite party turned futile. Further submitted that the complainant prayed for refund of Rs.6,32,500/- with 18% interest and demanding compensation, hence this complaint.

2.WRITTEN VERSION FILED BY THEOPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

          The opposite party submitted that the complaint has not been instituted against the proper entity, the same is liable to be dismissed.  The complainant has been filed against the wrong person. Without prejudice to the aforesaid preliminary objection to the complaint submitted that this Hon’ble forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.  The opposite party has not rendered any service to the complainant.  The complainant had booked the marriage hall and paid the rent in advance. After six months of booking hall, he approached the opposite party and requested to cancel the booking and sought for refund of the rental amount.  As per the terms and conditions the complainant was not entitled to get the refund of the rent in  the case of cancellation. The transaction between the complainant and opposite party is contractual in nature.  Hence, the complaint ought to have approached to resolve the alleged dispute by arbitration as per the agreement between the parties.  The parties have agreed that all disputes between them shall be referred to arbitration.  As such, the present complaint is not maintainable. Without prejudice to the same, the opposite party has been rendering its service to the customer with utmost care without any demur. The complainant approached the opposite party to book the marriage hall namely Shivaaruvenkatachalapathy palace on 28.07.2016 for wedding function from 30.04.2017 to 01.05.2017 and paid a sum of Rs.6,32,500/- towards rent in advance.   The complainant had approached the opposite party on 10.02.2017 and informed that he is cancelling the booking and sought to refund the rent paid by him in advance.  The opposite party stated that one of the term and conditions is that the rent paid in advance shall not be refundable under any circumstances except for the refundable caution deposit. The opposite party stated that the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.6,32,500/- as rent in advance on 28.07.2016 and not as a caution deposit. The opposite party reiterates that the amount paid but the complainant is only with respect to the rent and not security deposit and the same has been scored off in the receipt issued.  Subsequently the opposite party has not received any enquires or request for booking the venue on the aforesaid date and thus, the hall remained vacant on the said date. This complaint is only for the purpose of recovery of his money which was paid as advance.  The opposite party stated that non refund of money as per terms and conditions will not amount to deficiency of service and further stated that complainant has not enumerated any deficiency of service which warranted the filling of this complaint.  

 3. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party as alleged in the complaint?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs prayed in the complaint.     If, so to what extent?

The complainant filed proof affidavit and Ex.A1 to A5 were marked on his side.  The opposite party filed proof affidavit and no documents marked on the opposite party side.

4. POINT NO :1 :-       

The complainant had booked the opposite party marriage hall on account of his son’s wedding to be solemnized on 30/04/2017 and 1/05/2017. An advance payment of Rs.6,32,500/- towards rent was made vide receipt No.107, Dated:28.07.2016 which was marked as Ex.A2. Unfortunately the proposed marriage could not take place and hence the complainant has cancelled the  booking on 10.02.2017 which is 79 days in advance from the date of scheduled marriage.  The complainant made a written request which was marked as Ex.A2 to opposite party for a refund of caution deposit of Rs.6,32,500/-. Due to the refusal of the opposite party for refunding the amount paid in advance he complainant had issued a legal notice to opposite party on 04.09.2017 which was marked as Ex.A3 and the opposite party had refused to receive the same and returned cover was marked as Ex.A5.

 The opposite party contended that the advance amount paid by the complainant was advance rent only and not a caution deposit or security deposit as contended by the complainant and the same was also accepted by the complainant which is evidenced by Ex.A2 wherein the amount paid was shown as rent and word caution deposit was scored.  The opposite party in their averments clearly stated that the Clause No.2 of the terms and conditions states that “The applicant shall not be entitled for refund of the money paid as rent in case of cancellation, except for the refundable caution deposit.  The Applicant, however, will have the option to re-book the hall free of charges for his/her use on any subsequent days/days according to his/her choice within six months from the date of cancellation, subject to its availability.  The use of hall cannot be transferred by the applicant to any other person”.  Hence as per the terms and conditions agreed by the complainant there is no provision to refund the advance amount. Further the opposite party have been deprived of the total rent amount which would have been derived by the opposite party because of the cancellation made by the complainant. There is no proof to show that by virtue of cancellation on the same date the opposite party rented out the hall to any third party and derived income there from.  This commission is of considered view that the amount of rental advance paid by the complainant is not refundable as per the terms and conditions of the opposite party.  The citations relied upon by the complainant in the complaint are not applicable to the facts of the present case, in view of the terms and conditions which is marked as Ex.A1.  Though the complainant alleges that it is deposit amount but as per Ex.A2 it is only a rental advance and not deposit and hence  it is not refundable.  The complainant failed to prove the alleged unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Point No.1 is answered accordingly.

5. POINT NO :2 :-       

Based on findings given in point no.1  it is found that the complainant failed to prove the alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the opposite party and hence the complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed in the complaint and point No.2 is  answered accordingly.

In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No costs.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-Typist taken down, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 29^th  day of  June 2022.

MEMBER – II                                                                       PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1		Terms and conditions
Ex.A2	28.07.2016	Receipt No.710 issued by the opposite party for payment of Rs.6,32,500/-
Ex.A3	10.02.2017	Request letter of the complainant to refund the security deposit for cancellation of booking.
Ex.A4	04.09.2017	Legal notice to the opposite party
Ex.A5	12.09.2017	Legal notice returned envelope with endorsement ‘Refused’

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTY:

                                                -NIL-

 

MEMBER – II                                                                       PRESIDENT