BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.9/2022

DATED ON THIS THE 31^st December 2022

Present:      1) Sri. B.Narayanappa

M.A., LL.B., - PRESIDENT  

                     2) Smt.Lalitha.M.K.,

M.A., B.A.L., LL.B., - MEMBER  

Sri B.NARAYANAPPA,

PRESIDENT

1. The complainant Sri K.B.Raju, resident of Kiralu Village, Mysuru Taluk has filed this complaint against the OP – Proprietor/Manager of Bharathi Convention Centre, Mysuru praying to direct the OP to return the advance amount of Rs.56,000/- together with interest and cost by allowing the complaint and to grant such other reliefs as this Commission deems fit to grant.
2.       The brief facts are that:-

The OP is running marriage hall namely Bharathi Convention Centre.The complainant had booked the said marriage hall to perform the marriage of his sister’s son Avinash with Sandhya to be held on 23.05.2020 to 24.05.2020 and paid advance amount of Rs.6,000/- on 09.03.2020 and further paid Rs.50,000/- on 11.03.2020 totally he had paid Rs.56,000/-, but unfortunately since March 2020 in view of out-break of Covid-19 the lock-down was declared by Government.Hence, all the private gatherings were banned including public places like Cinema hall, Mall, shopping complex, swimming pool etc., till 16.05.2020.Therefore, it was not possible for complainant to perform the marriage and postponed it.In view of cancellation of marriage and the marriage hall was also cancelled and requested the OP to return the advance amount.But, the OP did not agreed to return the same. Hence, on 12.08.2020 the complainant got issued a legal notice to OP, calling upon OP to return the advance amount of Rs.56,000/-.The notice was served upon OP, but he has given untenable reply.Hence, this complaint.

3.       After registration of this complaint, notice was ordered to be issued to OP.  In response to notice, OP appeared before this Commission through his counsel and has filed version admitting the booking of convention hall of OP by complainant for his sister’s son marriage to be held on 23.05.2020 and 24.05.2020 by paying Rs.56,000/- by accepting the terms and conditions and denied the averments made in the complaint that upto 23.05.2020 the Government extended lock-down due to Covid-19 and shutdown all the public gatherings as such marriage has been postponed and contended that the OP neither denied to provide its agreed service nor caused any deficiency in service for providing his agreed services to the complainant.  The complainant is not entitled to any reliefs.  The OP agreed to  serve the complainant, the OP had to hire the services of other service providers for the marriage convention hall and accordingly, the OP paid an advance amount of Rs.26,000/- to service providers for illumination/lighting to building, chappara, welcome statue and pendhall in front of convention centre, Rs.3,000/- for additional vessels, Rs.2,000/- for supervising and security, for Rs.6,000/- for cleaning of dining and wedding hall and Rs.5,000/- for clears of bath and rest rooms totally the OP has advanced the amount of Rs.42,000/- to the service providers.  The complainant has not made any effort to intimate the cancellation of the marriage and not demanded refund of advance amount.  For all these reasons, the OP prays to dismiss the complaint.   
4.       The complainant has filed her affidavit and same was taken as P.W.1 and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.5.  On the other hand, the Op has not filed affidavit in spite of giving several opportunities.    
5. We have heard the oral arguments of counsel for complainant.  The OP and counsel were not present and not addressed arguments.      
6.        The points that would arise for our consideration are as under

1. Whether the complainants prove that the alleged deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and thereby he is entitled to the reliefs as sought for?
2.  What order?

7.       Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

      Point No.1 :- Partly in the affirmative.

      Point No.2 :- As per final order for the following

:: R E A S O N S ::

8.          Point No.1:- It is not in dispute that the complainant had booked the marriage convention centre belonging to OP to perform the marriage of his sister’s son Avinash and Sandhya to be held on 23.05.2020 and 24.05.2020 and paid advance amount of Rs.56,000/- to OP, but due to Covid-19, Government imposed lock-down and shutdown all the public gatherings such as Cinema hall, mall, shopping complex, swimming pool etc., till 16.05.2020.  Therefore, it is contended that the marriage was cancelled and postponed the same and asked the OP to return the advance amount of Rs.56,000/-, but OP did not return the advance amount.  Hence, the complainant was constrained to issue notice to OP on 12.08.2020 requesting the OP to return the advance amount, but no response from the OP side except issuing untenable reply.  Therefore, the complainant has filed the present complaint seeking necessary reliefs.  On the other hand, it the contention of the OP that the OP admitted the payment of Rs.56,000/- made by the complainant towards booking charges of marriage convention hall and denied the averments made in the complaint that the Government declared lock-down due to Covid-19 and banned all the public gatherings including Cinema hall, mall, shopping complex, swimming pool etc., till 16.05.2020 and further contended that the OP had paid a total sum of Rs.42,000/- out of advance amount paid by the complainant to the service providers for illuminating/lighting of building, chappara, to fix welcome statue, pendal infront of convention centre and for cleaning of dining and wedding hall and bath and restrooms and towards supervising and security etc., and contended that the complainant had not intimated the OP regarding cancellation/postponing of the wedding and to refund the advance amount.  Therefore, contended that the complainant is not entitled to any reliefs.
9. The complainant got marked Ex.P.1 the estimate issued by OP which discloses that the complainant had paid advance amount of Rs.56,000/- and the balance was Rs.1,30,000/. Therefore, from Ex.P.1 it is crystal clear that the complainant had paid advance amount of Rs.56,000/- to the OP towards booking charges of Bharathi Convention Centre run by OP.  Ex.P.2 is the Rules of Bharathi Convention Centre.  Ex.P.3 is the legal notice issued by complainant to OP, calling upon the OP to return advance amount of Rs.56,000/-.  Ex.P.4 is the postal receipt.  Ex.P.5 is the reply notice.  From the documentary evidence, it is crystal clear that the complainant had paid advance amount of Rs.56,000/- to OP towards booking charges of Bharathi Convention Centre run by OP to perform marriage of his sister’s son Avinash with Sandhya to be held on 23.05.2020 and 24.05.2020, but due to Covid-19, the Government ordered to lock-down and banned all the public gatherings like Cinema hall, mall, shopping complex, swimming pool etc., till 16.05.2020.  The contention of the complainant that due to Covid-19 the Government imposed lock-down was true and correct and the lock-down was continued till 16.05.2020 and the Government banned all the public gatherings like Cinema hall, mall, shopping complex, swimming pool etc., and given limited permission to perform marriage by participating 40 to 50 members, but it is the contention of the complainant that due to imposition of lock-down due to Covid-19 it was inevitable to postpone the marriage. Therefore, the marriage has been postponed and requested the OP to return the advance amount of Rs.56,000/-.  But, the OP did not heed to request of the complainant and not returned the advance amount in spite of request made by the complainant despite issuing legal notice dated 12.08.2020, on the ground that the OP had paid the advance amount of Rs.42,000/- to the service providers to provide lighting, chappara, to fix welcome statue, pendal in front of convention center and for cleaning bath and restroom and dining and wedding hall etc.,  But, the OP has not at all produced any receipts to show that he had paid Rs.42,000/- to the service providers for providing the aforementioned services for the marriage and it is the specific contention of the complainant that the marriage was postponed due to Covid-19 and lock-down declared by the Government and informed the same to OP regarding cancellation of the marriage and requested the OP to return the advance amount, in spite of it, the contention taken by the OP that he had paid advance amount of Rs.42,000/- to the service providers to provide services like lighting, chappara, to fix welcome statue, pendal in front of convention center and to cleaning bath and restroom and dining and wedding hall etc., appears to be vague and fishy and it appears that the OP has taken such contention to have wrongful gain from the complainant.
10. In view of the marriage has been cancelled/postponed due to Covid-19 lock-down declared by the Government, the complainant was unable to perform the marriage of his sister’s son Avinash with Sandhya.  Therefore, it was genuine on the part of complainant in requesting the OP to return the advance amount of Rs.56,000/-, but OP by taking unreasonable contention failed to refund the advance amount of Rs.56,000/- to the complainant.  The OP cannot withheld the advance money i.e. advance amount of Rs.56,000/- paid by the complainant instead he ought to have refunded the advance amount by deducting expenses such as tax to be payable to Government and charges towards cleaning, security charges etc., But, the OP instead of doing so has retained the total advance amount of Rs.56,000/- paid by the complainant which is incorrect on the part of OP.  The non-refund of the advance amount to the complainant by OP itself is a deficiency in service on the part of OP.  Therefore, we are of the considered view that the complainant has proved the deficiency in service on the part of OP hence we are of the opinion that OP is liable to refund the advance amount by deducting some amount towards payment of tax to Government and cleaning charges, security charges etc.,  Therefore, we are of the opinion that the OP is liable to pay Rs.40,000/- with interest to the complainant by deducting Rs.16,000/- towards expenses.   Hence, we answer point No.1 partly in the affirmative.
11.       Point No.2:- For the aforesaid reasons, we proceed to pass the following

:: ORDER ::

1. The complaint of the complainants is hereby allowed in part.
2. The opposite party is hereby directed to refund Rs.40,000/- to the complainant with interest at 10% p.a. within 2 months from the date of this order till payment by retaining Rs.16,000/- towards expenses such as for payment of tax to the Government, security charges and cleaning charges etc.,  
3. Further opposite party is hereby directed to pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- towards deficiency in service and Rs.2,000/- towards cost of the litigation to the complainant within 2 months from the date of this order.  Failing which, the compensation of Rs.2,000/- + cost of litigation of Rs.2,000/- = Rs.4,000/- shall carry interest at 10% p.a. till payment.
4. The complainant is at liberty to take action against the opposite party under Section 72 of the C.P.Act, 2019 for non-compliance of this order.
5. Furnish the copy of order to both parties at free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, corrected by us and then pronounced in open Commission on this the 31^st December, 2022)