Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/443/2015

Navdeep Singh Nayyar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chilis Grill & Bar, Premier Restaurant Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

In person

04 Nov 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/443/2015
Date of Institution	:	16/07/2015
Date of Decision	:	04/11/2015

 

Navdeep Singh Nayyar s/o Paramjit Singh resident of House No.601/5, Manvata Nagar, Hoshiarpur.

…..Complainant

V E R S U S

Chilis Grill & Bar, Premier Restaurant Pvt. Ltd., Elante Mall, Chandigarh through its Proprietor/Managing Director.

……Opposite Party

 

QUORUM:	P.L.AHUJA	PRESIDENT
	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                                               

                                                                       

ARGUED BY	:	Complainant in person
		Sh. A.D.S. Jattana, Counsel for the OP

                       

PER P.L.AHUJA, PRESIDENT

1.         Sh. Navdeep Singh Nayyar, complainant has filed this consumer complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against Chilis Grill & Bar, Opposite Party (hereinafter called the OP), alleging that on 5.7.2015, he alongwith his friend visited the restaurant of the OP for having some meals.  The complainant ordered for 1 Class Nachos Veg, 1 BB Chick Wings and 2 Mango Refresher total price of which came to around Rs.1,075/-.  When the complainant asked for the bill, he was shocked to see an extra amount of Rs.107.50 was added on the pretext of service charge which, according to him, was in violation of the ban imposed by the Chandigarh Administration on the restaurants from charging any service tax. Alleging that the aforesaid act amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP, the complainant has filed the instant complaint. 
2.         In its written statement cum evidence, the OP has admitted the issuance of the bill, but, it has been denied that any additional amount was charged. It has been contended that service charge (and not service tax) is a nominal fee collected from the customers for the betterment of the establishment and employees thereof and is not chargeable in the form of a statutory tax.  It has been stated that the memo dated 31.10.2014 instructing the restaurants/hotels in Chandigarh not to charge any service charge from customers was withdrawn and superseded by notification dated 24.2.2015. It has been contended that the OP was within its right to charge service charge. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on its part, OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 
3.         In his rejoinder the complainant has controverted the stand of the OP and reiterated his own.  It has been contended that the price of the food item includes all the costs starting from the raw materials to serving the same on the table fully processed and all the services of proper hospitality are included in the price of the item.  
4.         The parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
5.         We have perused the entire evidence and heard the arguments addressed by the complainant in person and learned Counsel for the OP. 
6.         The only point for determination in this case is whether the recovery of service charge to the tune of Rs.107.50 by the OP from the complainant amounts to deficiency in service and indulgence into unfair trade practice or not? 
7.         It has been urged by the complainant that the Chandigarh Administration has already declared service charge as illegal and has directed all the restaurants and hotels of Chandigarh not to levy service charge on the customers and accordingly the service charge cannot be levied on the food served at the table.  The complainant has vehemently argued that the action of the OP is illegal, therefore, he is entitled to the refund of the sum of Rs.107.50 charged as service charge apart from compensation for mental tension, harassment and litigation expenses.
8.         We have carefully considered the above arguments of the complainant. It is important to note that a similar complaint filed by one Sh. Gurinder Singh s/o Sh. Balbinder Singh against Nando’s Sukhmani Enterprises was allowed by this Forum.  However, Nando’s Sukhmani Enterprises went in appeal and the Hon’ble State Commission, UT, Chandigarh in First Appeal No.166 of 2015 decided on 14.8.2015 (Annexure OP-1/5) after taking into consideration the memo dated 24.2.2015 and the law settled by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that the restaurants/eateries can levy service charges from the consumers and the order passed by this Forum was set aside.  The said order of the Hon’ble State Commission, UT, Chandigarh has not been set aside in appeal/revision by the Hon’ble National Commission or the Hon’ble Supreme Court, therefore, the same is binding on this Forum. The Govt. has not issued any such notification that levy of such service charge by restaurants/eateries is illegal.  Accordingly, on the basis of the above said judgment of the Hon’ble State Commission, UT, Chandigarh we hold that the restaurants/eateries can levy service charge on the consumers and this consumer complaint for the refund of service charge and payment of compensation and litigation expenses is not maintainable before us.
9.         Consequently, the present consumer complaint is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. 
10.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
04/11/2015	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[Surjeet Kaur]	[P. L. Ahuja]
hg	Member	Member	President