Delhi

West Delhi

CC/14/549

Prem Kumar Saigal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Vimal Bayana - Opp.Party(s)

08 Dec 2014

ORDER

 CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

150-151, Community Centre, C-Block, Janak Puri, New Delhi – 110058

 

                                                                                     Date of institution           : 22.8.14

 

Case. No.DF-III/549/14/                                                                          Date of order                : 28.5.16

In the matter of :-

Sh. Prem Kumar Saigal,

B-53/1, DDA Flats, Nariana Vihar,

New Delhi-110028.                                                                             Complainant

Vs.

Sh. Vimal Bayana

The then Partner of the Vatika Complex(Banquet Hall),

7/126, Ramesh Nagar Gole Chakar,

New Delhi                                                                                           Opposite Party-1

 

Sh. Gagan Chaddha

The then Partner of the Vatika Complex(Banquet Hall),

B-001, Trinity Tower Phase-5,

DLF City, Gurgaon-122002

Haryana                                                                                              Opposite Party-2

 

Mr. J.C. Singh C/o A.K. Singh

The then Partner of the Vatika Complex(Banquet Hall),

Flat No.15, Type 5, Lodhi Road Complex,

New Delhi-110018.                                                                            Opposite Party-3

 

 

Sh. Varun Chopra, President,

The then Partner of the Vatika Complex(Banquet Hall),

C-1/59, Safdarjung Dev. Area,

New Delhi.                                                                                          Opposite Party-4

 (R.S. BAGRI, PRESIDENT)

O R D E R     

 

                        The brief facts of the complaint as stated are that Sh. Prem Kumar Saigal herein the complainant booked Vatika Banquet Hall owned by opposite parties for 5.12.12 on 2.9.12 for marriage of his daughter on payment of                Rs. 20,000/- as advance.    On 8.10.12, he  paid  a  sum of  Rs.  50,000/- also  as

-2-

advance.  But due to some unavoidable circumstances and reasons marriage to be soleminzed on 5.12.12 had to be cancelled.  The complainant on 22.10.12 informed the opposite parties of cancellation of the marriage and booking.  On 3.11.12 he sent e-mail and on 6.11.12 a letter  to the opposite parties for cancellation of the booking and refund of the advance money.  Thereafter,   the complainant visited the opposite parties several times and requested them to refund the advance money of Rs. 70,000/-.  But to no effect.    Therefore, the present complaint for direction to the opposite parties for refund of the advance sum of Rs. 70,000/- with interest @ 24% P.A. with compensation of                             Rs. 2.00 lacs for mental pain, agony and suffering and Rs. 20,000/- as litigation expenses.

 

            On notice opposite parties filed joint reply while contesting the complaint and raising preliminary objections of concealment of true and material facts,  the complaint is false and frivolous and there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.   However, on merits the opposite parties admitted booking of the Banquet Hall and receipt of Rs. 70,000/- as advance money.  But asserted  that due to booking of the complainant the opposite party could not be able to book the Banquet Hall again on 5.12.12.    Therefore, he suffered  huge financial loss, the advance money is non refundable  and prayed for dismissal  of the complaint.

 

            The complainant filed rejoinder to the reply of the opposite parties  while controverting the stand taken by the opposite parties in the reply and reiterated  his    stand  taken in  the  complaint.      He   once  again  prayed   for

-3-

direction to the opposite parties to refund the advance  money of Rs. 70,000/- with interest, compensation and cost of litigation.

 

            When the complainant was asked to lead evidence.  He submitted his affidavit  narrating the facts of the complaint.    The complainant in support of his case also relied upon photocopy of the receipt-cum-terms and conditions for booking of the Banquet Hall executed by the parties on 2.9.12, receipt of payment of Rs. 50,000/- dated 8.10.12 and e-mail letter dated 3.11.12.

 

            From the perusal of the documents relied upon by the complainant, it reveals that  complainant on 2.9.12 booked a Banquet Hall for marriage of his daughter to be soleminzed  on 5.12.12.   The complainant on 2.9.12 paid a sum of Rs. 20,000/-  and on 8.10.12 paid a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as advance to the opposite parties.  He on 3.11.12 send a request for cancellation of the booking.  

           

            The only ground given for cancellation of the booking by the complainant is unavoidable circumstances.    He has failed to disclose the unavoidable circumstances.    From receipt dated 5.9.12, it reveals that the receipt and terms and conditions are signed by both the parties and advance money is non refundable.

 

            We have heard the complainant in person and have gone through the material on record carefully and thoroughly.

 

 

-4-

            Admittedly, the complainant on 5.9.12 paid a sum of Rs. 20,000/- to the opposite parties for booking of Banquet Hall of the opposite parties for marriage of his daughter to be soleminzed on 5.12.12.   He also paid Rs. 70,000/- on 8.10.12.   But according to the receipt-cum-terms and conditions  filed by the parties, the advance paid  by complainant  is non refundable.    The parties are bound by the terms and conditions of the receipt, expert, affidavit of the complaint.   There is nothing on record to prove that complainant is entitled for refund of the advance money.   The affidavit of the complainant only is not sufficient to prove that the advance paid by complainant is refundable as he is an  interested person being complainant. 

 

            Hence,  there   is no deficiency of service  and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties . Therefore, the opposite parties rightly refused to refund the advance money received by them for  booking of their  Banquet  Hall.      Resultantly, there is no merit in the complaint and the same fails and is hereby dismissed.

 

Order pronounced on   : 28.5.2016

 

 

• Copy of order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
• File be  consigned to record.

 

 

 

 

(PUNEET LAMBA)                               (URMILA GUPTA)                   ( R.S.  BAGRI )

  MEMBER                                            MEMBER                               PRESIDENT