BEOFRE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 71 of 2016

DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 111.04.2016

DATE OF ORDER: -   12.04.2017    

Tulsi Dass son of Sh. Shankar Dass, resident of village Chang, Tehsil & District Bhiwani.

           ……………Complainant.

VERSUS

The Manager, Utsav Banquet Hall, Rohtak Road near new bus stand, Bhiwani.

………….. Opposite Party.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT

BEFORE :-  Shri Rajesh Jindal, President

Mrs. Sudesh, Member

Mr. Parmod Kumar, Member

Present:- Complainant in person.

     Shri N.K. Jangra, Advocate for OP.

ORDER:-

Rajesh Jindal, President:

                   The case of the complainant in brief, is that the complainant had booked Utsav Banquet Hall, Bhiwani by depositing Rs. 32,000/- as a part of security amount of Rs. 62,000/- vide receipt dated 21.12.2015 for marriage celebration of his daughter namely, Neha and due to declaration of curfew in Jat Arakshan remained upto 25.02.2016 and requested for cancellation of Utsav Banquet Hall, Bhiwani.   It is alleged that the complainant went to the OP and requested for return the deposited security amount but to no avail. The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the opposite party, he had to suffer mental agony and harassment. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OP and as such he had to file the present complaint.

2.                 Opposite party on appearance filed written statement alleging therein that the complainant has booked the Utsav Banquet Hall, for the celebration of marriage of his daughter on 21.12.2015 and at the time of booking, it was made clear that the advance money is non-refundable.  It is submitted that on 24.02.2016 banquet hall was fully ready for celebration of the marriage and the answering OP had spent most of the advance money on arrangements and complainant neither cancelled the reservation nor informed the answering respondent about not using the banquet hall on 24.02.2016. Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of respondent and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.

3.                In order to make out his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-27 alongwith supporting affidavit.

4.                In reply thereto, the counsel for OP has tendered into evidence affidavit Exhibit R-1.

5.                We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the parties.

6                   The complainant in person reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that he had paid Rs. 32,000/- to OP as advance for the booking of the banquet hall for 24.02.2016 for the marriage of his daughter.  He submitted that the banquet hall was booked for Rs. 62,000/- alongwith facilities to be provided by the OP.  He submitted that due to the agitation of JAT ARAKSHAN curfew in the area, he requested the OP to cancel the booking and the marriage was celebrated at his village.  The OP is liable to refund the amount of Rs. 32,000/- to the complainant.

7.                Learned counsel for the opposite party reiterated the contents of the reply. He submitted that at the time of the booking of the banquet hall on 21.12.2015 it was made clear to the complainant that the advance money is non-refundable.  This condition is mentioned at serial No. 3 on the receipt dated 21.12.2015 issued by the OP to the complainant.  The OP made all preparations and arrangements at the banquet hall for 24.02.2016 and spent huge amount for making arrangements like decorations, light, chairs, tables, generator  and other things.  He submitted that there was no curfew on 24.02.2016 in Bhiwani City.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP and the OP is not liable to refund the advance money to the complainant.

8.                We have perused the record of the case , carefully.  The material facts of the case are not in dispute.  The complainant is demanding back advance which was paid by him for the booking of the banquet hall of OP which he cannot used due to curfew clamped in the area.  To support his contention regarding the curfew, the complainant has produced the orders dated 19.02.2016, 21.02.2016, 23.02.2016, 24.02.2016 passed by District Magistrate, Bhiwani under Section 144 of Cr.P.C.,1973.  Indisputably, there was agitation of Jat Reservation in the area and there was curfew in the area on 24.02.2016.  The counsel for the OP has contended that the OP has spent almost the advance money for making arrangements and preparations in the banquet hall for the marriage of the daughter of the complainant.  Considering the facts of the case, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant against the OP.  The OP is directed to refund Rs. 27,000/- after deducting Rs. 5,000/- out of 32,000/- paid by the complainant to him, to the complainant.  This order be complied with by the OP within 45 days from the date of passing of this order. Certified copies of the order be sent to both the parties, free of costs and file be consigned to the record room.

Announced in open Forum.

Dated: 12.04.2017.                                          (Rajesh Jindal)

                                                                             President,   

                                                                   District Consumer Disputes

                                                                   Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

(Parmod Kumar)                     (Sudesh)      

    Member.                              Member.