Back
DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Honble Mr. Justice A.P. Chowdhri, President &
Mr. Desh Bandhu, Member
JAYPRAKASH AGARWAL—Complainant
versus
MANAGING DIRECTOR, ASHOK HOTEL —Opposite Party
Case No. C-66 of 1995—Decided on 23.2.1998
For the Complainant : Nemo.
For the Opposite Party :Mr. G.P. Upman & Mr. Vishnu Dayal, Advocates.
In summary proceedings, disputed questions of fact requiring detailed evidence and cross-examination of witnesses cannot be satisfactorily determined, and the complainant should seek remedy in the Civil Court.
Headnote:
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT - SECTION 2(1)(g) - DEFICIENCY IN SERVICE - CATERING SERVICES - BOOKING FOR 800 GUESTS WITH 10% INCREASE - SHORTAGE OF FOOD ITEMS - MISBEHAVIOUR OF STAFF - COMPLAINT DISMISSED DUE TO LACK OF EVIDENCE IN SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS - REMEDY IN CIVIL COURT.
Fact of the Case:
Complainant booked a convention hall for a wedding dinner with an assured number of 1,000 guests, which could increase by 10%. The opposite party, the hotel, claimed the booking was for 800 guests with a 10% increase. During the dinner, there were deficiencies in service, including shortage of food items, removal of buffet tables while guests were still eating, and discourteous staff behavior. The complainant filed a consumer complaint seeking compensation for inconvenience and mental pain.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the material averments were expressly denied and the necessary facts could only be established through detailed evidence, including examination and cross-examination of witnesses, which was not possible in summary proceedings. The court also noted that the booking order signed by the complainant indicated a booking for 800 guests with a 10% increase, supporting the hotel's claim.
Issues: 1. Whether the hotel provided deficient services during the wedding dinner. 2. Whether the complainant was entitled to compensation for inconvenience and mental pain.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that in the absence of detailed evidence and cross-examination of witnesses, it could not determine the disputed questions of fact, such as the number of guests, the shortage of food items, and the alleged misbehavior of staff. The court also considered the booking order signed by the complainant, which supported the hotel's claim regarding the number of guests.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the consumer complaint due to lack of evidence in summary proceedings and advised the complainant to seek remedy in the Civil Court.
Mr. Justice A.P. Chowdhri, President — On 25.3.1993, Mr. Jayaprakash Agarwal, complainant for short, booked Convention Hall of Ashok Hotel, New Delhi for a dinner in connection with the marriage of complainant's relation Miss Neeru to be held on 7.6.1993. Menu was settled and the charges were to be made per plate. The case of the complainant is that the assured number of guests was 1,000 and the number could exceed by 10%. In the dinner arranged by the opposite party, there were a large number of deficiencies. Many guests were not served even with water. Many of the guests were not served several items on the menu including chapaties, nan. The number of buffet tables were removed while the guests were still taking their meals. About 60% of the guests were not served with salad. The staff of the opposite party was discourteous. The complainant asked for the complaint-book for lodging his complaint. The same was not made available. The complainant was obliged to lodge complaint in writing on a separate sheet of paper on 8.6.1993. The complainant also served a legal notice dated 19.7.1994 to which reply was received dated 27.10.1993. The complainant claimed compensation amounting to Rs. 5 lacs for the inconvenience and mental pain suffered by him. The complaint was filed on 15.3.1995.
2. In the written version the opposite party stated that the agreed number of guests, as per booking order, was 700. It was then increased to 800 and the booking clerk accordingly changed the figure originally written in the Function Booking Order by over-writing the figure '8' for the original figure 7 and handed over a copy of the booking order to the complainant. The number agreed to was 800 which could increase by 10% and full arrangements for catering to the said number of guests was made. Infact, the number of guests, who attended, increased to more than 1,000. Dal Halwa, which was one of the dishes in the menu, became short after having been served to about 900 guests and the same could not be arranged at that stage. Instead, an alternative sweet-dish was arranged and served. Various deficiencies were expressly denied. It was further pleaded that some of the guests became inabriated and quarrelled with the staff of the opposite party. With regard to removal of the some of the buffet tables, it was stated that after 900 guests had taken their dinner, some tables were removed at the instance of Mr. Bindal, father of the bride, apparently to make more space for the guests, who stayed on for the wedding ceremony. The averments made in the written version were controverted in the rejoinder filed by the complainant. The complainant filed his own affidavit and that of Mr. S.V. Raju, Advocate, who was one of the guests. The opposite party filed affidavits of Mr. Shankar Singh, Booking Clerk, Miss Sudha Chandra, Dy. General Manager and Mr. Vidyut Chatterjee, Sr. Maitre D. Hotel. The opposite party also filed copy of the booking order made by the complainant under his signature. None appeared for the complainant when the complaint was called on for hearing. Infact, none appeared for the complainant on the preceding three dates, namely 10.11.1997, 21.8.1997 and 2.7.1997. The last date on which complainant's Counsel Mr. H.A. Raichura appeared was 30.4.1997 when he filed his written arguments. We have heard Mr. G.P. Upman, Advocate for the opposite party and have carefully gone through the records including the written arguments filed on behalf of both the parties. According to the written statement, water was served from 7p.m. till the conclusion of the function and there was no shortage thereof at any stage. It has been admitted that after serving about 900 guests Dal Halwa, which was one of the dishes in the menu was finished. The same could not be prepared at that stage and the opposite party offered and served an alternative sweet-dish. With regard to discourteous behaviour on the part of the staff of the opposite party, it has been stated that i
