The main legal point established in the judgment is that a hotel may not be liable for the loss of a customer's car if the customer has accepted explicit terms excluding the hotel's responsibility. However, the court may award compensation for mental tension, harassment, and inconvenience caused to the customer.

Mr. Justice D.P. Wadhwa, President—It is the opposite party, the Hotel, who is the appellant before us. There were two complainants, one was Mulchand Agarwal, whose car was stolen from the parking lot of the appellant and the second was the Insurance Company with which said car was comprehensively insured.

2. Appellant is running Hotel in Mumbai. Complaint was that Mulchand with his friend visited the Hotel of the appellant for food. He parked his car in the premises of the Hotel of the appellant. At the time of parking a token was given to him by the attendant of the parking lot. On this token it was written as under :

“No. B. 11896

Date and time

Parked by

Car No. 9729

Please produce this to get your car. Management does not accept responsibility for any Theft/Damage/Loss.”

3. When Mulchand Agarwal came back from the Hotel he found his car missing from the parking lot. Mulchand lodged a complaint with the appellant for the loss of the car. It was the contention of the complainant that because of the negligence on the part of the appellant that his car was stolen. To meet the issue of consideration, plea taken was that when Mulchand visited the Hotel it was for taking food and charges for food included service rendered by the appellant for keeping the vehicle of the customer in the Hotel premises. It was the contention of Mulchand that it was obligation of the Hotel management to compensate him for the loss of his car which was stolen from the parking lot of the appellant’s Hotel. His further contention was that Hotel of the appellant was luxury Hotel and the appellant was under obligation to take care of his car parked in the premises of the Hotel and since the car was in the custody of the Hotel from where it was stolen it was for the appellant to compensate the complainant Mulchand for the loss of his car.

4. Case of the complainant as reflected in the complaint was that “the driver of the opposite party (Hotel) approached the complainant and requested the complainant to leave the car and told him that he will park the car at proper place since the opposite party provides free car parking facility to its guests”. To this it was added that the cost of the food which the complainant took in the Hotel included the service charges which in turn including consideration for the parking of his car in the Hotel premises without payment of any separate charges. Lastly, it was submitted that it was the obligation of any luxury Hotel to provide facility of parking to the guests and there was obligation to take care of the vehicle so parked in the premises of the Hotel. It was further submitted that not only that the appellant charges high rates, complainant selected the Hotel of the appellant because of parking facility and other amenities available. At the gate employee of the appellant took the key of the car from him and issued him token. It was the duty of the appellant to return the key and car to Mulchand against token. There was a failure and breach of the duty when car was handed over to somebody else without taking the token from that unauthorised person. Appellant was thus negligent and careless and provided deficient service.

5. Appellant, Hotel, referred to the token given to Mulchand at the time of parking of his car where on the face of the token itself was clearly written “Management does not accept responsibility for any Theft/Damage/Loss”. Mulchand did not pay any amount for parking of the car and in fact it was his own case that it was a free parking. Complainant though paid for his food consumed in the Hotel but no separate charge was paid by him for parking of his car. It was contended by the Hotel that when a customer comes to the Hotel and parks his car it was not necessary that he must consume food there and pay for that. A person visits the Hotel for various reasons. Some come on foot as well. It could not be said that a person who comes on foot and consumes his food would have the price for free parking included i