Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/900/2019

Mr Hitesh Gulati - Complainant(s)

Versus

Booking.com - Opp.Party(s)

Ashok Paul Jagga & Rajan Puri

02 Jun 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.

:

CC/900/2019

Date of Institution

:

02/09/2019

Date of Decision   

:

02/06/2022

 

Mr. Hitesh Gulati son of Sh. Madan Lal Gulati resident of House No.61, Sector 8A, Chandigarh.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

  1. Booking.com, Email: th Floor, Golf Course Road Sector 43, Near DLF Phase V, Gurgaon 122002.
  2. The Principal Officer, Skyline View, CB Platinum Pent Houses, Next to London Eye, 110 Gaunt Street, London UK SEI6FN.

                         Contesting Opposite Parties

  1. Royal Thistle, Trafalgar Square, London, UK
  2. HDFC Bank Ltd., SCO 78-79, Sector 8C, Chandigarh through its Branch Manager.

Performa Opposite Parties

CORAM :

SURJEET KAUR

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

SURESH KUMAR SARDANA

MEMBER

 

 

 

 

                                                

ARGUED BY

:

Sh.Ashok Paul Jagga, Counsel for complainant.

 

:

OP No.1 ex-parte.

 

:

Complaint against OP No.2 & 3 dismissed vide order dated 06.09.2019.

 

:

Sh.Ajay Pratap Singh Sehgal, Counsel for OP No.4 (OP No.4 ex-parte).

Per Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member

  1.      Briefly stated the allegations are that the complainant had requested to OP No.1 to book an appropriate, graceful and prestigious accommodation of a 3 BHK Flat in London. The OP No.1 booked a 3 BHK flat with the OP No.2 for the period from 08.06.2019 to 16.06.2019. The complainant’s daughter was also attending a course in London from 08.06.2019 to 15.06.2019. A sum of Rs.3,57,097.66 was deposited through credit card of the complainant on account of fee for accommodation  (Annexure C-1). The emails from OP No.2 to the complainant confirming the booking are annexed as (Annexure C-2). In the last minute, the complainant came to know that the OP No.2 had cancelled the booking merely for the reason that the prevailing accommodation charges in London had appreciated on account of the ongoing Cricket World Cup and the accommodation earlier booked by complainant for a sum of Rs.3,57,097/- having been appreciated to the tune of Rs.8 Lac for equivalent period, the OPs cancelled the booking for certain commercial/profit making reasons. According to the complainant, he could get a 2 BHK accommodation with smaller rooms on 3rd and 6th floor in Hotel Royal Trafalgar London against his booked accommodation of 3 BHK apartments in better location with the OP No.2, against the earlier booked accommodation of 3 BHK apartment of OP No.2 for Rs.3,57,097.66, the subsequent accommodation was booked with 2 BHK and of smaller rooms at different floors, despite all caution complainant had to avail the same, for a sum of Rs.4.75 Lac which was paid through the same credit card. Alleging that the OP No.1 & 2 are both responsible jointly and severally for the said grave deficiency in service as well as the loss suffered by complainant, this present consumer complaint was filed.
  2.     Notice of the complaint was sent to OP No.1 seeking its version of the case. However, nobody appeared on behalf of OP No.1 despite service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte on 21.11.2019.
  3.     Complaint against OP No.2 & 3 was dismissed vide order dated 06.09.2019.
  4.     Notice of the complaint was sent to OP No.4 seeking its version of the case. Opposite Party appeared, but failed to file reply & evidence despite several opportunities, despite service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte on 22.01.2021.
  5.     Complainant led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
  6.     We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the record of the case. After perusal of record, our findings are as under:-
  7.     On perusal of Annexure C-1, it is observed that the Opposite Parties have confirmed the booking of accommodation with CB-Platinum apartment London. On perusal of Annexure C-3, it is observed that a payment of GBP Rs.3832/- (equivalent to Rs.3,57,097.66) has been paid by the complainant to the Opposite Party No.1 & 2. On perusal of Annexure C-9, it is observed that the complainant have paid an amount of Rs.4,75,000/-, towards booking an alternative accommodation due to cancellation of earlier accommodation by the OP No.1 & 2. On perusal of the complaint, it is also observed that the complainant was left with no other choice, except to book an alternative accommodation, due to last minute cancellation of earlier booked accommodation and due to which the complainant had to bear an additional expenditure burden of [Rs.4,75,000/- (-) Rs.3,57,097.66 = Rs.1,17,902.34]. In that circumstances the agony of the consumer can be imagined when the consumer had booked the accommodation for making its life better and instead of making his and family members life comfortable the consumer is put into much harassment and mental agony. Therefore, the proper course for opposite party No.1 is to reimburse the additional amount paid by the complainant for booking of another accommodation. It is also true that the complainant and his family members suffered due to cancellation of earlier reserved/booked accommodation by the OP No.1, for which the complainant is also entitled for compensation and costs of litigation.
  8.     Significantly, Opposite Party No.1 & 4 did not appear to contest the claim of the complainant and preferred to proceed against ex-parte. This act of the Opposite Party No.1 & 4 draws an adverse inference against them. The non-appearance of the Opposite Party No.1 & 4 shows that they have nothing to say in their defence against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted.
  9.     In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly partly allowed. Opposite Party No.1 is directed as under :-
  1. to pay an amount of Rs.1,17,902.34 to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint.
  2. to pay an amount of ₹50,000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him;
  3. to pay ₹10,000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.
  1.     Complaint against OP No.2 & 3 was dismissed vide order dated 06.09.2019.
  2.     Since neither any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice has been alleged nor any relief has been prayed against OP No.4, therefore, the consumer complaint qua it stands dismissed with no order as to costs.
  3.     This order be complied with by the Opposite Party No.1 within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, it shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
  4.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

 

Sd/-

Sd/-

 

02/06/2022

[Suresh Kumar Sardana]

[Surjeet Kaur]

 

Ls

Member

Presiding Member

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.