Delhi

New Delhi

CC/193/2006

Samir Baruah - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Hotel Le Meridian - Opp.Party(s)

08 Jun 2017

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI),

 ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

 NEW DELHI-110001

 

 

Case No.C.C./193/2006                                                 Dated:

 

In the matter of:

SAMIR BARUAH

C/o Indian Overseas Bank,

3^rd Floor Navchetna Kendra

10, Ashok Marg, Lucknow

            ……..COMPLAINANT

 

 

VERSUS

 

 

HOTAL BE MERIDIEN

Windsor Place, Janpath

New Delhi-110001

       .... OPPOSITE PARTY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MEMBER: NIPUR CHANDNA

ORDER

           

The case of the complainant is that he had a visit to Delhi and during his visit, he stayed in the opposite party Hotel since 23^rd February, 2004. It is alleged by the complainant that on 25.02.2004 at about 9.00 a.m., when he was walking down the steps from the Coffee Shop to come to Reception Lobby along with his colleages, he fell down due to missing of step, as the stairs and the floor were of the same make and colour without any line of demarcation, and the last step of the said staircase was triangular in shape by not providing any sufficient place for proper stepping thereon. It is alleged by the complainant that out of the said accident , which had taken place virtually for want of proper architectural design of the structure and care of the OP Hotel , the complainant received severe injuries resulting into serious damages of his knee cap leading fractures therein. It is alleged by the complainant that on receiving the aforesaid injuries he had to keep lying on the floor with shooting pain, and no first aid had been provided to him by the OP, he was not taken up from the ground for sufficient time nor any stretcher was provided to him, he was kept on trolley and driven to one corner of the lobby and was kept there for more than 45 minutes without any medical aid and treatment, & neither any resident doctor was called. It is further alleged by the complainant that OP Hotel arrange  a general physician that too after more than one hour of the accident , and further alleged that the OP hotel even failed to arrange ambulance to take him to the  hospital  and the same was arranged by him  

It is alleged by the complainant that OP Hotel being a reputed and standing hotel , did not even bother to take care of  him and left him to fend for himself at time of accident. This act of OP amounts to deficiency in services, hence this complaint.

            Complaint has been contested by the OP. It denies any deficiency in services on its part. Para no. 5-10 of the para wise reply of the WS of OP is relevant and is reproduced as under:-

“5. That the contents of para 5 of the complaint denied. It is submitted that the complainant missed a step due to his own mistake, oversight or preoccupation while walking down the steps from the Coffee Shop. It is specifically denied that stairs and floor were of the same make and colour and without demarcation. It is denied that there were deceptive lighting arrangements. The floor at the Coffee Shop is clearly identifiable with brown granite affixed thereon, which is distinct and separate from the white marble on the stair of Coffee Shop. Being regular guest of the Opposite party, the complainant was well aware of the geography design, colour of floor/ steps, lighting arrangement and interiors of the Coffee shop as well as Hotel. That the hotel has never witnessed any such incident in the past where as guest had fallen owning to missing a step due to colour of the stairs being deceptive itself highlights that the claim of the complainant is hollow and devoid of any substance and merit.

 

6. That the content of para 6 of the Complaint denied. It is submitted that Opposite party is a Deluxe Five Star Hotel and all the architectural design of structure, interior designing and lighting are done by internationally reputed concerns taking into consideration all the safety measures.

 

7-9. That the contents of para 7-9 of the Complaint are denied. It is submitted that immediate attention was paid to injuries of complainant and attended to by Dr. Bhalla, resident doctor of Opposite party. Further, submitted that coffee Shop is a place, which is always packed with guests, and the Opposite party could not afford to keep an injured guest there without due care and concern.

 

 

10. That the contents of para 10 of the complaint are denied. It is submitted that the Complainant and his Other colleagues, Sh Narendra Prasad, Chief Regional Manager and Sh Deepak  Naik, Sr. Mgr. insisted upon admitting the complainant to St.Stephen’s Hospital only. The delay, whatsoever, is cause due to the mere fact of distance between Hotel and St. Stephen’s Hospital accompanied with the fact  of peak office hour traffic at 9.00 am when the complainant slipped and injured himself. Had there been no insistence from the Complainant and his colleague to admit him St.Stephen’s Hospital , the ambulance would have arrived at the Hotel from RML Hospital within minutes, but the complainant suffered shoots of pain for his own choice of hospital Sh. Rohtas Sing ,S.S.A. was deputed by the opposite party to accompany the complainant in the ambulance.”

 

Complainant has filed his evidence by way of affidavit. On behalf of OP evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. Dinesh Negi, Manager  and evidence by way of affidavit of Dr. Rajiv Bhalla  witness no.1 is file.

            We have heard the arguments advanced at the bar and have perused the record.

                        It is contended on behalf of the complainant that the alleged accident had occurred as the stairs and the floor were of the same make and color without any line of demarcation, and the last step of the said staircase was triangular in shape not providing any sufficient place for proper stepping thereon. The Ld. Counsel on behalf of the complainant had also argued that after receiving the injuries, complainant was lying on the floor with shooting pains,but the OP hotel had no first aid facility was to provide him, neither the resident doctor nor any doctor on call was immediately made available. The OP  arranged a general physician that too after one hours of the incident, the OP could not arrange ambulance for the complainant and that too was arranged by himself. It is alleged by the complainant that this act of OP amounts to deficiency in services.

            Counsel for the OP on the other hand had denied any deficiency in services on its part and argued that complainant had failed to place on record any evidence as to how the said incident resulting to his knee injury had taken place for want of proper architectural design of the  structure , it is further argued on behalf of OP that complainant himself admits in his complaint that he is a regular visitor of the OP and as such he was well aware about the Geography , design , color of floor/steps , lighting arrangement and interiors of the coffee shop as well as Hotel and  no single complaint was ever made by him against the architectural design. It is further argued on behalf of Op that the alleged incident occur at 9.00 a.m. and doctor was called on 9.15 a.m. and Dr. Bhalla reached on 9.30 a.m. at the Coffee Shop an administered the “ Voveran “ injunction to the complainant., and advised to  get him shift to RML Hospital for X-Ray and other diagnosis , but the colleagues of the complainant insisted upon admitting to St. Stephen’s Hospital Only and the delay whatsoever is caused is only due to the distance between Hotel and St. Stephen’s Hospital . It is also argued on behalf of Op that the complainant had already claimed an amount of Rs. 22,837/- from his Employer i.e Overseas Bank toward medical expenses bills and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.

            We have carefully gone through the complaint and the document annexed by it, the complainant had alleged in his complaint that alleged accident occur due to the architectural defect in the Hotel, but failed to place on record any evidence in this regard. Complaint has alleged deficiency in services on the part of Op for not providing first aid to him and to kept him on the trolley for more than 45 minutes without any medical aid and treatment, and also for not calling any doctor as well as for non – calling of ambulance to take him to some hospital. All the above allegations are rebutted by the OP by filing Evidence of Dr. Rajiv Bhalla , MBBS , Hony. Physician to the 10^th President of India. We have gone through the Evidence filed by Dr. Rajiv Bhalla, in which it is stated that he was informed about the incident on 9.15 a.m and he reached the hotel at 9.30 a.m., & administered the injection of “ Voveran “ so as to relieve the complainant from pain and advise to shift him to RML Hospital for X-Ray and further Diagnosis , but the complainant and his colleague Mr. Deepak  Naik  insisted for treatment in St. Stephen Hospital being on the panel of Bank ,and both left for St. Stephen Hospital against my advice at 10.15 a.m.   

            The evidence in affidavit of Dr. Rajiv Bhalla has proved that the OP has provided medical aid within couple of minutes to the complainant, and it was the complainant who refused to get admitted in RML Hospital as advised by the Doctor and he become adamant to be admitted in Stephen hospital , therefore , the delay whatever caused was due to the time required in making the arrangement according to the wish of the complainant and not deliberately on the part of the op. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant has failed to proved the case of deficiency in service against the OP. We find no merits in the present complaint ,same is hereby dismissed.

One true copy each of this order be sent to the concerned parties by post.

 

This order be sent to server (www.confonet.nic.in ). 

 

The file be consigned to the Record Room.

 

Order Pronounced on                                         .

 

 

 

                             (S K SARVARIA)

                               PRESIDENT

 

                                  (NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                (H M VYAS)

                                          MEMBER                                                              MEMBER