Haryana

Panchkula

CC/375/2021

HANS RAJ ROHILLA. - Complainant(s)

Versus

VIKAS MINERAL FOODS PVT.LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

NARESH KUMAR JOSHI & PARIKSHIT GOYAL

03 Apr 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,  PANCHKULA

 

                                                       

Consumer Complaint No	:	375 of 2021
Date of Institution	:	08.09.2021
Date of Decision	:	03.04.2024

 

 

Hans Raj Rohilla, S/o Sh. Prabhu Dayal, R/o 484, Sector-26, Panchkula, Haryana – 134116.

                                                                           ….Complainant

 

Versus

1.     Vikas Mineral Foods Pvt. Ltd., through its Director, having  address at 20 NAC, Shivalik Enclave, Manimajra, Chandigarh-160101 and also at Khasra No.692/465, ‘Casavillaz’, Ramgarh-Mubarikpur Road, Kakrali, SAS Nagar, Punjab-140307.

2.     Vikas Gupta, Director/Authorised Signatory, having address at Khasra No.692/465, ‘Casavillaz’, Ramgarh-Mubarikpur Road, Kakrali, SAS Nagar, Punjab- 140307.  

                                                                                                                                                                                                ….Opposite Parties

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019

 

 

Before:              Sh. Satpal, President.

Dr. Sushma Garg, Member.

Dr. Barhm Parkash Yadav, Member

 

 

For the Parties:   Sh. Parikshit Goyal, Advocate alongwith complainant.

                        Sh. Rohit Kumar, Advocate for OPs No.1 & 2.

                         

 

ORDER

(Satpal, President)

1.             The brief facts, as alleged, in the present complaint are, that the complainant had paid a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, as booking amount out of total settled amount of Rs.6,75,000/-, for holding the marriage function of his daughter in the Casavillaz Banquet Palace/hall, owned and managed by Ops No.1 & 2. On 04.01.2021, out of the said booking amount, Rs.1,000/- was paid in cash and a sum of Rs.4,9000/- was paid from the account of the complainant’s son, namely, Sh.Manjeet Kumar by way of IMPS(online transfer) bearing no. 100411348255. On 03.03.2021, the complainant further paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- from his bank account to OP No.1 by way of NEFT, bearing no. PUNBH21062275814 and thus, total booking amount of Rs.1,00,000/-  was paid  in advance  to OPs No.1 & 2. It is averred that a receipt no.022 dated 17.04.2021, acknowledging the receipt of Rs.1,00,000/- as booking charges from the complainant, was issued by the OPs. It is stated that the Government of Punjab vide notification no. 7/56/2021/2H4/1457 dated 20.03.2021 had restricted the numbers of persons, who could gather at the marriage ceremony, to a maximum limit of 20 persons,  keeping in view in view the surge in the Covid-19 cases. It is alleged that the complainant had planned the gathering of more than 300 persons at the wedding venue and keeping in view the restrictions imposed by the Punjab Government, contacted the OP No.2 and apprised him about the restrictions as imposed by the Government. It is alleged that the OP No.2 convinced the complainant that no problem would occur and that the marriage function would be held as promised in a smooth manner. It is stated that the Government of Punjab vide notification no.7/56/2020/2H4/1968 dated 19.04.2021 had continued the earlier restriction imposed vide notification no. 7/56/2021/2H4/1457 dated 20.03.2021. It is stated that the complainant was worried about the solemnization of the marriage of his daughter on 24.04.2021 in a smooth manner and keeping in view the sharp rise in covid-19 cases, contacted the OP No.2 seeking clarification qua the arrangements but the OP No.2 avoided to clarify the real situation. It is averred that  the complainant in view of the sharp rise in covid-19 cases had requested  the OP No.2  to refund the booking amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, which was paid in advance but the OP No.2 flatly refused  and offered  another marriage hall i.e. Sheeshmahal Panchkula for holding the marriage function. It is averred that the complainant had paid the booking amount for holding the function at the Casavillaz Banquet Hall, SAS Nagar Mohali, Punjab. It is averred that  the Government of Haryana vide notification no.46/4/2020-5HB-II dated 11.03.2020, which were extended till 31.03.2022 vide another notification no.46/4/2020-5HB-II dated 09.04.2021 had banned the gathering of large number of persons at a public function, in order to check the spread of covid-19. It is stated that  the bill receipt no.022, dated 17.04.2021, for an advance sum of Rs.1,00,000/- was issued under the name of OP No.1 ‘Vikas Mineral  Foods Pvt. Ltd.’, having  GSTIN No.03AABCV2453J1Z1. However,  as per the details  revealed  by the Goods and Services Tax portal, Government of India, it has been found that  the OPs have been registered under the HSN categories ‘22019090’- “Water, including  natural or artificial mineral waters and aerated waters, not containing  added  sugar or other sweetening  matter nor flavored, ice and snow”, “39072090’- “Polyacetals, other polyether and epoxide resins, in primary forms, polycarbonates, alkyd resins, plyethers and other polyesters, in primary forms, other polyethers”, ‘00440035’- “Mandeep Keeper”. It is therefore, clear that the Ops have misrepresented their business/services to the complainant. The GSTIN number of the OP No.1 reveals registration of business activities that are completely different from marriage hall/banquet services. It is stated that the same amounts to ‘misleading advertisement’ as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019. It is stated that the OPs are not even registered for providing services related to marriage function. Due to the massive outbreak of corona virus, the complainant was left with no choice but to defer the marriage function of his daughter. The hard decision had to be taken in light of the strict government notifications and also to protect the lives of family, friends and relatives. It is submitted that the request for refund of advance money as paid by the complainant is justified and valid. It is stated that refusal by the OP No.2 to refund/return the booking amount is not valid and justified. Due to the act and conduct of the OPs, the complainant has suffered financial loss and mental agony, physical harassment; hence the present complaint.

2.             Upon notices, the OPs No. 1 & 2 have appeared and filed the written statement by taking several preliminary objections such as the present complaint is not maintainable; the complainant has no locus standil to file the present complaint; he is estopped by his own act and conduct; no cause of action has accrued in favour of the complainant and against the OPs No.1 & 2. It is submitted that the complainant has not approached the Commission with clean hands as he has concealed the true material facts. It is submitted that the complainant approached the OP No.2 for booking of the Banquet Hall, namely, Casavillaz, resort near Sector-28, Panchkula, Ramgarh Mubarkpur, Derabassi Road, Zirakpur(Punjab) in the month of January 2021 to organize the wedding function of his daughter, which was fixed for 24.04.2021. The total payment for organizing the marriage ceremony was settled as Rs.6,75,000/-. After the said finalization the OP No.2 told the complainant that the whole payment i.e. Rs.6,75,000/- was to be paid  prior  to one week  of the marriage function and the amount would be non-refundable.  It is submitted that a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- was paid  by the complainant in advance as booking amount, which was paid by OP No.2 to various vendors for making arrangements, pertaining to catering, decoration, chat Counter, Fruits stalls, Bridal Entry, D.J. Setup and other things as directed by the complainant to be there in the venue at the time of function. The complainant in the month of March 2021 called the OP No.2 to finalize the number of guests at the marriage venue keeping in view the Government notifications, wherein restrictions were imposed on the gathering of large numbers of persons at the venue in wake of prevailing covid-19 situation. It is stated that the OP no.2 telephonically conveyed the complainant that Punjab Government was giving permission only for limited persons but, the Haryana Government was allowing the gathering of 150-200 persons at the marriage venue. The complainant requested the OP No.2 to arrange the other venue in Haryana, so, as to accommodate all the guests. It is stated that the OP No.2 arranged the alternative venue i.e Sheesh Mahal, Panchkula, which was situated at a five minutes drive from Ramgarh to Funcity, Panchkula and the complainant had consented to the said alternate venue; which is clear from the whatsapp messages dated 02.04.2021 between the complainant and OP No.2. The said venue was booked at premium price as the said premise was liked by the complainant and his family members but the OP No.2 did not charge the extra charges for the said new venue. On 12.04.2021, through whatsapp message, the complainant made certain changes in the food menu. It is stated that the complainant, on 13.04.2021 visited the premises and finalized the food menu and also asked to make certain additional decoration. It is stated that the OP No.2 was ready and willing to carry out the event at Sheesh Mahal, Panchkula, instead of Casa Villaz as per the change of premises/ banquet hall by the complainant. It is stated that the complainant through email sent a message to OP No.2 on 18.04.2021 to refund the advance deposit. In the said email messages, the complainant with ulterior motive and to grab the illegal  money,  leveled  false  allegations  regarding paying  of Rs.2,00,000/- in cash  to the OP just to skip  from paying  the legal liability of the bill of Rs.5,75,000/- out of Rs.6,75,000/- as the complainant has paid only Rs.1,00,000/- to the OP No.2. The OPs had, time and again, the complainant requested to pay the outstanding amount pending towards him. It is stated that the complainant started making false excuses and lingered on the request of the OP No.2 to pay the balance amount. The OP No.2, on 18.04.2021, sent a message through email to complainant to pay the balance amount as the complainant have, unilaterally, cancelled the event i.e. marriage function. It is stated that the OP No.2 also took the liquor license from Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Panchkula. The OP No.2 again sent a message through email on 13.05.2021 to pay the balance amount.  It is submitted that the complainant has filed a complaint no.1075/P/SSP before SSP, Mohali (Punjab) dated 07.06.2021 and another complaint no.945-PWU dated 05.08.2021 before the Police Commissioner, Panchkula.

                On merits, it is submitted that the OP No.2 had taken the permission from SDM, Panchkula vide letter dated 22.04.2021 qua holding of the marriage function with the gathering of 200 persons at the venue of Sheesh Mahal, Panchkula. It is submitted that the complaints as filed by the complainant against the Ops with the Police Authorities were rejected being frivolous, baseless and meritless. Rest of the averments made by the complainant in the complaint has been denied being frivolous, baseless and meritless and thus, prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint.      

3.             To prove the case, the complainant has tendered the affidavit as Annexure C-A along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-8 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OPs No.1 & 2 has tendered the affidavit as Annexure R-A along with documents Annexure R-1 to R-15 in evidence and closed the evidence.        

4.             We have heard the learned counsels for the complainant as well as OPs No.1 & 2 and gone through the record available on file including the written arguments filed by the complainant as well as OPs  and minutely and carefully.

5.             It is not in dispute that a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, as booking amount, was paid by the complainant to Ops qua holding of marriage function of his daughter at marriage palace i.e. Casavillaz SAS Nagar Mohali, on 24.04.2021 that the booking amount was paid in parts i.e. by way of cash, IMPS and NEFT on 04.01.2021 and 03.03.2021 respectively and the OPs have acknowledged the receipt of booking amount of Rs.1,00,000/- vide receipt dated 17.04.2021(Annexure C-4) issued by them. It is also not in dispute that the Government of Punjab vide notification dated 20.03.2021 followed by another notification dated 19.04.2021 had restricted the public gathering persons to maximum of 20.

6.             As per the version of the complainant, the gathering of more than 300 persons as planned at the time of marriage function at Casavillaz, SAS Nagar Mohali(PB) was not feasible in the light of restrictions imposed by the Government of Punjab vide notification dated 20.03.2021 and 19.04.2021, and thus, his request for refund of booking amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was valid and justified. During arguments, the learned counsel for the complainant, reiterating the averments as made in the complaint as also in his affidavit(Annexure C-A), contended that the request of the complainant seeking the refund of his booking amount in the light of restrictions imposed by the government of Punjab vide notification dated 20.03.2021 and 19.04.2021 was valid and justified. It was argued that the holding of marriage function at the alternate venue i.e. Sheesh Mahal Panchkula as alleged by Ops, was not feasible because the public gathering of large numbers of persons were banned by the Government of Haryana vide notification dated 11.03.2020 followed by another notification dated 19.04.2021 in order to check the spread of Covid-19 cases. It was argued that no license of liquor from Dy. Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Panchkula, as alleged by the OPs, was taken. Further, it was argued that no permission from SDM Panchkula for holding the function was taken. Concluding the arguments, the learned counsel contended that the Ops are not even registered for providing the services related to marriage function, as per GST Portal, Government of India, and thus, they have fraudulently advertised under the banner of Casavillaz. The learned counsel has prayed for acceptance of the complaint by granting the relief as claimed for in the complaint. Reliance has been placed on the following case laws:-

1. M/s Bath Castle and Anr Vs. Manjit Kaur in First Appeal No.970  of   2015 (SCDRC, Punjab)
2. Ramgarhia Bhawan Vs. Ravati Raman Verma II(1998) CPJ 9 (SCDRC, Chandigarh)
3. Dr.M..Sebastian Vs. Dr. N.Jagadeesan & Anr., I (1998) CPJ 242 (SCDRC, Pondicherry).
4. Mrs. Angela Fonseca Vs. Coral Lawns & Anr., II(1991) CPJ 670 (SCDRC, Maharashtra).

7.             On the other hand, the Ld. Counsel for the OPs have contested the complaint on several grounds. The main submissions as made by the leaned counsel are summarized as under:-

i.      That the payment in advance to various vendors and service     provider i.e. catering, decoration, chat Counter, Fruits stalls,       Bridal Entry, D.J. Setup etc. was given out of the booking       amount, so as to ensure the proper arrangements qua all items         at the wedding site.

ii.      That the alternate venue i.e. Sheeshmahal, Panchkula in place of       Casavillaz, SAS Mohali, Punjab was offered to the complainant for    holding  the marriage function of his daughter  on 24.04.2021      and the same was  accepted by him alongwith some changes in      the venue.

iii.     That a liquor license was taken from Dy. Excise and Taxation     Commissioner, Panchkula.

iv.     That the permission for holding the function was also taken from        SDM,        Panchkula on 22.04.2021.

8.             The learned counsel reiterated the         averments as made in the written statement as also in the affidavit(Annexure R-A) and refuted the assertions as made by the complainant and contended that the denial by the Ops to refund the booking amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant was         based on valid and solid grounds and thus, the complaint is liable to be dismissed being frivolous, baseless and meritless.

9.             After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the question that arises for adjudication before the Commission, is, whether the refusal by the OPs to refund the booking amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant is/was based on valid and justified grounds.

10.            The Ops in their defence have taken the plea that the advance payment was made to various vendors so as to ensure the making of arrangements and delivery of services qua catering decoration, chat Counter, Fruits stalls, Bridal Entry, D.J. Setup etc. at the time of marriage function but no proof qua making of such payment, as alleged, to the vendors has been placed on record by the OPs in order to substantiate and prove their contentions. It is well settled legal proposition that mere bald assertions which are not corroborated and substantiated by any adequate, cogent and credible evidence do not carry any evidentiary value.

                The next plea taken by the Ops that liquor license was taken by them from Dy. Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Panchkula is also not tenable because the said license was issued for 30.04.2021 whereas the function was to be held on 24.04.2021 and further, the temporary license L-12A(Annexure R-5) was granted to one person, namely, Parveen Arora, who had no connection, whatsoever, with the complainant.

        The next plea as taken by the Ops in their defence is that necessary permission for organizing the marriage function was taken  from SDM, Panchkula vide letter dated 22.04.2021. However, no such permission or letter is placed on record by Ops in support of their contentions.

11.            The last plea as taken by Ops in their defence is that an alternate venue i.e. Sheeshmahal, Panchkula, Haryana was offered to the complainant for holding the marriage function.

        This plea is also of no avail to the case of the Ops keeping in view the restrictions imposed by the Government of Haryana, on the gathering of persons at a public functions vide notification dated 11.03.2020 followed by notification dated 09.04.2021(Annexure C-7). Further, the OPs have not placed on record any such documents that the owner of Sheesh Mahal, Panchkula (Haryana) had consented to the holding of marriage function on 20.04.2021. It is also not the case of the OPs that the alternate site i.e. Sheesh Mahal Panchkula was owned or managed by them. Even otherwise, keeping in view the restrictions imposed by the Government of Haryana vide notification dated 11.03.2020 followed by 09.03.2021 (Annexure C-7) on the gathering of persons at the marriage venue, it was not feasible for the Ops to deliver the services at the marriage venue for gathering of more than 300 persons as planned by the complainant.

12.            Keeping in view the aforesaid factual position, the refusal by the OPs to refund the booking amount as paid by the complainant was not based on valid and justified grounds. Thus, we conclude that the Ops were deficient, while rendering services to the complainant, for which, they are liable, jointly and severally, to compensate him.

13.            In relief, the complainant has claimed the refund of Rs.1,00,000/- as paid by him as booking amount along with compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.50,000/- on account of mental agony, harassment and litigation charges respectively.

14.            As a sequel to above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint with the following directions to the OPs No. 1 and 2:-

1. To refund an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, to the complainant along with interest @9% per annum(simple interest) w.e.f. 03.03.2021 till its actual realization.
2. To pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment.
3. To pay an amount of Rs.5,500/- as litigation charges.

 

15.            The OPs No. 1 & 2 shall comply with the order within a period of 45 days from the date of communication of copy of this order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to approach this Commission for initiation of proceedings under Section 71/72 of CP Act, against the OPs No. 1 & 2. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties to the complaint and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced on:03.04.2024

 

 

 

Dr.Barhm Parkash Yadav      Dr.Sushma Garg             Satpal               

                Member                          Member                        President

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

                                                 Satpal                       

                                                President