Haryana

Ambala

CC/260/2020

Bhrigu Ghai - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Palmdale Banquets - Opp.Party(s)

Puneet Kumar

27 Jul 2022

ORDER

 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

 

                                                                      Complaint case no.         :     260 of 2020

                                                          Date of Institution           :     03.11.2020

                                                          Date of decision     :     27.07.2022.

Bhrigu Ghai aged about 30 years son of Shri Ashwani Ghai, Resident of House No.50, Jail Land, Sector-1, Ambala City (Haryana).         

                                                                             ……. Complainant.

                                      Versus

1. The Palmdale Banquets, through its Proprietor Sh.Krishan Garg, NH-65, Ambala-Hisar Road, Village Durkhara, Ambala City-134003 Mobile No.+91-98140-10798; +91-84277-77987 E-Mail ID:- palmdalebanquetambala@gmail.com

 

2. Sh. Aman Jain, Event Manager, The Palmdale Banquets, NH-65, Ambala-Hisar Road, Village Durkhara, Ambala City- 134003.

                                                                    ….…. Opposite Parties.

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member.

                   Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.

 

Present:       Shri S.K.Sud, Advocate, counsel for the complainant.

                   None for the OPs.

 

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

1.                Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

(i) To refund Rs.50,000/- (received by the opposite parties on 01.10.2019 and 02.10.2019) to the complainant alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the date of receipt of the said amount.

(ii) To pay Rs.2,00,000/-, as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant.

(iii) To pay Rs.35,000/- as litigation expenses. 

2.             Brief facts of the case are that the complainant booked the Banquet Hall of the OPs for solemnizing functions of his brother-Himanshu Ghai for 01.10.2019 and 02.10.2019, for which an amount of Rs.1,40,000/- was settled between the parties. Complainant paid an amount of Rs.30,000/- in two installments of Rs.20,000/- on 17.07.2019 through online transaction vide UPI Reference ID No.919841081307, and Rs.10,000/- on 17.07.2019 through online transaction vide UPI ID No.919841087511. Receipt No.442 dated 17.07.2019, for an amount of Rs.30,000/- aforesaid  was also issued by the OPs. Subsequently, the OPs received another amount of Rs.20,000/- in cash on 20.08.2019 and made an endorsement, on the back of the Receipt dated 17.07.2019. In this manner, total amount of Rs.50,000/- stood received by the OPs from the complainant. For certain reasons, the functions could not be held on 01.10.2019 and 02.10.2019 and as such complainant requested the OPs for refund of the amount of Rs.50,000/- but they did not pay any heed to his request. When number of request made by the complainant did not yield any result, he served legal notice dated 22.08.2020 (dispatched on 26.08.2020) upon the OPs asking them to refund the sum of Rs.50,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. but to no avail. By not refunding the amount of Rs.50,000/-, the OPs have committed deficiency in service. Hence, the present complaint.
3.           Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed written version, raised preliminary objections with regard to maintainability, locus stand, not come with clean hands and concealed the true and material facts etc.  On merits, it is stated that complainant himself had cancelled the booking, without any reasons, as a result of which, the OPs could not assign the booking in favour of any other person. Refund could not have been allowed pursuant to the terms and conditions agreed upon between the parties, which were printed on the overleaf of the receipt no 442 dated 17/07/2019,. Condition/point no. 11 on the overleaf of the receipt clearly states that  In case of cancellation Advance will not be refundable & if cancellation is not given in 30 days advance before the function date full amount of function is to be charged. The cancellation of function was not conveyed to the OPs until three days before the functions, when the OPs contacted the complainant for making payment of balance payment of Rs.90,000/-. Refund cannot be made to the complainant, as the OPs had already made advances to the decorator, caterers and others, for the functions.  Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by the answering OPs and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with costs.
4.           Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of complainant as Annexure CA alongwith documents Annexure C-1 to C-8 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant. However, it is pertinent to mention here that the OPs failed to lead any evidence despite availing various opportunities, therefore, evidence of the OPs have been closed by the order of this Commission on 13.06.2022.
5.           We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and carefully gone through the case file.
6.           Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that complainant had got the booking of the functions cancelled, as such, no services were provided by the OPs, they are thus liable to refund the entire amount of Rs.50,000/- received by them.
7.            It is not in dispute that the complainant booked the premises of the OPs to solemnize functions of his brother on 01.10.2019 and 02.10.2019, for which total amount of Rs.1,40,000/- was settled between the parties. It has also been fairly admitted by the OPs that total amount of Rs.50,000/- stood received by them from the complainant. It is also not in dispute between the parties that on account of some reason, the said booking was got cancelled by the complainant. 
8.           It is significant to mention here that the plea taken by the OPs for non-refunding of any part of amount out of Rs.50,000/- is that they have already further paid this amount, as advance, to the decorators, caterers and other parties, and that as per terms and conditions mentioned on the document, Annexure C-5, the complainant has failed to get the cancellation of the premises within the prescribed period.  
9.                 First coming to the plea taken by the OPs for non-refunding of any part of amount out of Rs.50,000/- on account of the reason that they have already paid this amount, as advance, to the decorators, caterers and other parties, it is submitted here that this plea did not merit acceptance because it is clearly evident from receipt dated 442 dated 17.07.2019, Annexure C-5 that only Venue was booked by the complainant for the said functions, as it has been clearly mentioned on the said receipt as “No Decor” and “Only Venue”. Under these circumstances, the aforesaid plea taken by the OPs is not tenable, hence, stands rejected.  

10.     Now coming to the second plea of the OPs, that since the complainant has failed to cancel booking of the premises within the prescribed period as per terms and conditions mentioned in Annexure C-5, therefore, he is not entitled to refund of the amount paid.  In this regard, it is state here that in the present case, none of the parties have been able to prove, as to on which  exact date, cancellation of the booking was done. In order to prove their case, on one hand complainant has failed to produce any document regarding the cancellation of the booking and on the other hand, the OPs also failed to produce any document to show the exact date of the cancellation of the booking.

11.               Be that as it may, the fact remains that despite receiving an amount of Rs.50,000/- from the complainant, the OPs did not provide any service to the complainant, on account of cancellation of bookings of their premises. Since, as held above, none of the parties have been able to  prove before this Commission, regarding exact date of cancellation of the bookings of the premises of OPs, as such, in view of peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the considered opinion that keeping in mind the principles of equity, fair play and substantial justice, if we order refund of the amount paid by the complainant, after deducting 25% out of the deposited amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.50,000/- - Rs.12,500/- = Rs.37,500/-), that will meet the ends of justice.

12.               In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby partly allow the present complaint and OPs jointly and severally are directed, in the following manner:

1. To refund the amount of Rs.37,500/-, to the complainant,  alongwith interest @ 4% p.a. w.e.f 17.07.2019, i.e the date on which complainant deposited the advance amount with the OPs, till its realisation.  
2. To pay Rs.3,000/- as litigation costs. 

          The OPs are further directed to comply with the aforesaid directions within the period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced on :27.07.2022.

 

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)            (Ruby Sharma)               (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                               Member                          President