O R D E R

Sri. P. Satheesh Chandran Nair (President):

                The petitioner filed this petition u/s. 12 of the C.P. Act against the opposite parties for reliefs.

        2. The case of the petitioner is stated as follows:  The petitioner and the 8 other family members decided to go for a pick nick to certain tourist station of South India from 18^th December to 28^th December, 2014.  As the part of this trip petitioner booked the opposite parties “Wayanad Gate Resort” for the stay of 25^th day of December, 2014 through online website and he remitted room rent of Rs.2,657/- in advance to opposite party.  According to him, the actual amount of the said hotel charge is Rs.3,764/- and he has got a discount because of a ‘Clear trip booking’.  He decided to book this hotel because it is situated near of National Highway and considering the large facilities available in this hotel.  The petitioner and the other family members arrived the hotel premises at 9.40 P.M on 25.12.2014.  When he arrived in front of the reception counter nobody was present there to entertain them.  Even though he waited there for 15 minutes nobody arrived there to hear him.  At last he made loud voice and after some time a person came from nearby Kitchen and told him that the hotel booked by him was not that one and which is situated in another place for that he would have to gone for that purpose.  The petitioner objected that reply and at last the said person admitted that the booked rooms are not available.  The said person arranged another hotel which was 3 kilometers away from that place.  At last, the petitioner is compelled to accept this suggestion and he took all the family members including senior citizens and ladies to the hotel which was situated 8 k.m away from their hotel spending 15 minutes of journey.  The name of the said hotel is “Kuruva Gate Residency” and it seems a home stay residence.  After the completion of the formalities of registration at about 10.50 p.m.  they allotted a rooms for the petitioner.  The condition of the allotted room is having no facility for a deluxe room and it has no cleanness, sufficient bed, blanket, pillow which all were not available, moreover even soap, towel, water facilities are also not sufficient there.  According to the petitioner, there is no restaurant facility was in that hotel, from some were else they collected some foods and allotted to inmates.  On the next day afternoon most of the inmates including 3 children suffered omitting and stomach disease due to the defect of the food provided by the hotel.  There is no hot water facility available there, so that senior citizens of the pick nick parties suffered feaver and cold.  As a result of the above act of the opposite party, the petitioner approached this Forum to redress his grievances and for taking necessary action against the opposite party and request to allow Rs.25,000/- as compensation and loss of this journey. 

                3. On the basis of the complaint stated above this Forum heard the petitioner and issued notice to opposite party, even though the notice is duly served to the opposite party, he did not turned up before the Forum.  Hence the opposite party declared exparte.  In the above case the point we have to consider is:

1. Whether the petition before the Forum is maintainable?
2. If it is maintainable regarding the relief and cost?

        4. Point Nos.1 & 2:- The petitioner in this case examined before the Forum as PW1 and marked Ext.A1 to A3.  When this petitioner examined as PW1 before the Forum he almost deposed in terms of his complaint.  According to him, he decided to spent ten days pick nick with his family members but due to the unexpected surrounding and unexpected facilities and difficulties happened at the time of Wayanad stay his mental condition was became so sorrow and felt loss and mental agony like anything.  According to him, he booked 2 deluxe rooms with all kinds of modern facilities.  But the opposite party allotted so inconvenient room without any deluxe facilities and he expected standard and hygienic food from the residency but compelled to consume poor food which is resulted some kind of diseases also.  He deposed clearly the poor condition and facilities of the rooms which was allotted to him.  The petitioner produced a receipt dated 12.12.2014 of “Wayanad Gate Resort” for Rs.2,657/- before the Forum and it is marked as Ext.A1.  As per Ext.A1, it is evident to say that the petitioner paid the room rent in advance to the opposite party for a better stay in opposite party’s hotel.  As per Ext.A2 the photos which had been taken from the web site shows that the elevation of the hotel and facilities of the rooms are so better.  This is the reason why the petitioner avail this hotel for his pick nick trip.  The Ext.A3 gives an interference of poor and pathetic condition of rooms which were allotted to the petitioner.  The evidence adduced by the petitioner as PW1 and the exhibit marked as Exts.A1 to A3 were not challenged by the opposite party, since the opposite party is already declared as exparte.  Hence the evidence of the petitioner is unchallengeable before the Forum.  Therefore, after considering the pleading, depositions, exhibit and considering the nature of the case the evidence adduced by the petitioner is sufficient to give an award against the opposite party in this petition.  The evidence before the Forum is sufficient to believe that the opposite party is committed deficiency in service.  Therefore, the Point No.1 and 2 found in favour of petitioner and we decided to allow the following relief:

1. The opposite party is directed to return the Room Rent Rs.2,671/- (Rupees Two Thousand six hundred and seventy one only) to the petitioner.
2. The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the petitioner as compensation to the petitioner.

1. The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) as the cost of the case to the petitioner.  (All the above award amount with an interest of 10% shall be calculated till the realization from the date of order onwards).

         Declared in the Open Forum on this the 28^th day of February, 2015.

                                                                         (Sd/-)

                                                       P. Satheesh Chandran Nair,

                                                                    (President)

Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member – 1)    :  (Sd/-)  

Smt. Sheela Jacob (Member – II)       :   (Sd/-)   

Appendix:

Witness examined on the side of the complainant:

PW1   :  Sujith Bhakthan

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:

A1  : Receipt dated 12.12.2014 of “Wayanad Gate Resort” for 

        Rs.2,657/-.

A2  :  Photos of the hotel facilities

A3  :  Photos of the poor and pathetic condition of rooms.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties:  Nil.

Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties:  Nil.

                                                                                 (By Order)

                                                                                                                             (Sd/-)

                                                                                                            Senior Superintendent.

Copy to:-   (1) Mr. Sujith Bhakthan, Thundumadom,

                      Kozhencherry.P.O., Pathanamthitta,

                      Pin – 689641.                                                   

1.  The Manager (Or the Management), Wayanad Gate    

   Resort, Mananthavady, Mysore – Kattikulam Road,

                      Wayanad – 670 645.

                 (3) The Stock File.