##PAGE1##

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

CHANDIGARH

FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/4/FA/254/2025

(Against the Order dated 7th July 2025 in Complaint No. DC/AB1/44/CC/206/2023 of the District

Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Chandigarh district commission)

PARMPREET DIWAN S/O GURCHARAN DASS .......Appellant(s)

PRESENT ADDRESS - 1A, CIVIL HOSPITAL CAMPUS, MANI MAJRA,

Versus

HOTEL SUNBEAM THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR AND MANAGER Th .......Respondent(s)

PRESENT ADDRESS - SCO 1058-61, SECTOR 22-C, CHANDIGARH. , C

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MRS. PADMA PANDEY , PRESIDING MEMBER

HON'BLE MR. RAJESH KUMAR ARYA , MEMBER

FOR THE APPELLANT: ABHILAKSH GROVER (Advocate)

DATED: 30/01/2026

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

(Additional Bench

Appeal No. : 254 of 2025

Date of Institution : 22.08.2025

Date of Decision : 30.01.2026

Hotel Sunbeam, SCO 1058-61, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh through its

Proprietor/Manager.

--Appellant

V e r s u s

Parmpreet Diwan s/o Sh.Gurcharan Dass, Resident of 1A, Civil Hospital Campus,

Mani Majra UT, Chandigarh.

…Respondent

Appeal against the order dated 07.07.2025 passed by District Consumer

Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh in Consumer

Complaint No.206/2023.

BEFORE: MRS. PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER

MR.RAJESH K.ARYA, MEMBER

For the appellant : Ms.Khushboo Garg, Advocate for

Sh.Abhilaksh Grover, Advocate

For the respondent : Sh.Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate alongwith

Ms.Jyotsana Kanchan,Advocate

PER PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER

This appeal is directed against the order dated 07.07.2025, passed by

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh (hereinafter

to be referred as “the Ld. District Commission”), whereby consumer complaint

(CC/206/2023) filed by the complainant/respondent was partly allowed and the

Opposite Party/appellant(herein) was directed as under ;

i) to refund Rs.18,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9%

per annum from the date of cancellation i.e. 09.11.2022 till the

date of its actual realization.

ii) to pay lump sum compensation of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant

on account of mental agony & harassment including litigation

expenses.”

2. Before the Ld. District Commission, it was case of the complainant that

marriage of his sister was fixed for 14.12.2022 and Ladies Sangeet was fixed for

13.12.2022. The complainant approached the Opposite Party in order to book the

banquet hall for the function of Ladies Sangeet which was to be held on 13.12.2022.

It was assured by the Manager of the OP Hotel that they will arrange the best

function and if function was cancelled 7 days before the stipulated date, the entire

booking amount deposited by the complainant, would be refundable. Acting on

the assurances and projections made by the Opposite Party, the complainant

deposited the booking amount of Rs.18,000/- with the OP Hotel for Ladies Sangeet

function of his sister. The payment was made through Google Pay, receipt of which

is Annexure C-1. It was stated that due to some personal and unavoidable

reasons, the marriage program of the sister of complainant got cancelled. The

complainant vide letter dated 09.11.2022 (Annexure C-2) followed by e-mails dated

09.11.2022 and 22.11.2022 (Annexure C-3), requested the Opposite Party for

cancellation of the booking and sought refund of the deposited amount but neither

any reply was received, nor the amount was refunded. When all efforts made by

the complainant to seek redressal of his grievance could not get any tangible

result, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the

opposite party, a consumer complaint was filed before the Learned District

Commission seeking refund of Rs.18,000/- alongwith interest, compensation and

litigation expenses.

3.. Pursuant to issuance of notice, Opposite party appeared before the

Learned District Commission and contested the complaint. In its written version,

while admitting the factual matrix of the case, it was inter-alia stated that the

terms and conditions for the function were duly e