State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Anil Khanna vs M/S Fnp Events & Weddings Pvt. Ltd. on 7 March, 2014
IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI (Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of Decision : 07.03.2014 Complaint Case No.92/2012 Sh. Anil Khanna S/o Sh. O.P.Khanna R/o A-263, Shivalik New Delhi Complainant VERSUS M/s FNP Events & Weddings Pvt. Ltd. Having its office at FNP Estate Ashram Marg, Mandi Road, Gadaipur New Delhi-110030 Through its authorised officer, Mr. Arvind Kumar. .....Opposite Party CORAM S.A.Siddiqui, Member (Judicial) S.C.Jain, Member
1. Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?
S.A.Siddiqui, Member (Judicial) Judgment
1) Complainant Sh. Anil Khanna has filed this complaint against the OP for return of Rs. 8,01,000/- received from the complainant by the respondent for providing agreed services but committed gross deficiency of service, compensation of Rs. 25,00,000/- for mental agony, pain and harassment etc. and litigation cost of Rs. 1,00,000/-.
2) The marriage ceremony of complainants daughter was scheduled to be solemnized on 06.05.2011 following which the complainant decided to engage the services of respondent company which represented to have immense market reputation in providing works of painting, props, accessories, floral, fabric and linen and other related works including generators and lighting. The respondent promised to make various wedding functions such as Bhajan Sandhya (on 29.04.2011), Sagan (on 04.05.2011) Mehndi/Ladies Sangeet (on 05.05.2011) and finally wedding ceremony on 06.05.2011, a resounding success and memorable. Accordingly Mr. Vikas Gututiya, MD of respondent company and Mr. Jasvinder Singh Saran Senior Manger visited the complainant. Both the representatives were briefed in detailed about the themes of all wedding functions. As per discussions held with the MD and Sh. Jasvinder Singh Saran, the complainant ordered for the designing and printing of wedding card annexure P/1, which was inconsonance with the theme of various wedding functions primarily based on the theme of lotus flower and madhubani painting. It was agreed that the entire decor of all the wedding functions shall be in accordance with the colour and theme of the wedding card. Consequently job contract was confirmed. One function prospectus annexure P/2 was issued by Ms. Kirti Ahuja on 14.02.2011. Total consideration for the event management was fixed at Rs. 8.57 Lac and schedule of payment was mentioned. Significantly, as per job contract the last 25% of the total consideration was to be paid on the day of wedding function and at the time of site handover.
3) The complainant in order to make this marriage memorable planned all the events and kind of decor to be done in each functions in detail with respondent company much in advance from the month of February 2011 onwards. However, there was huge gap between the promise and the performance, as the promises made by the respondent company turned out to be utterly false and incorrect. The respondent company entrusted the decoration job of various wedding functions to its senior manager Sh. Jasvinder Singh Saran who had long discussions with the complainant and understood the services to be performed in all the functions.
But for the reasons best known to the respondent, Sh. Jasvinder Singh Saran did not interact with the complainant at subsequent stages with the result mismanagement and chaos were noticed in all wedding functions leading to gross deficiency of service on the part of the respondent. The involvement of Sh. Jasvinder Singh Saran in the function was crucial and it was entrusted to him and his name was printed in the prospectus.
The following deficiencies were noticeable in the various wedding functions:-
i.
Bhajan Sandhya was held on 29.04.2011 at the residence of the complainant. The mattresses were found to be in bad shape.
Further, in complete disregard and violation of the understanding reached between the parties there was no proper decoration of flower highlighting with dias at the dinner area as would be clear from the DVD annexure P/3 attached with the complaint.
ii.
Sagan Ceremony was held on 04.05.2011 in ITC Welcome Hotel in Saket, New Delhi. In this ceremony pink, white, magenda colours and lotus flower were agreed to be the main theme. But contrary to the discussions and agreement gross deficiency were noted in the decoration. At the main gate and the hall gate, there was no lotus props as per the agreement and instead of the same only a pedestal was fixed. There was hardly any flower in the entrance gate the flower which were put were not fresh. Apart from this no decoration worth the name could be seen at the entrance. The work surrounding appeared in bad taste. Contrary to agreement there were no water bodies having lotus. There was no flower at the food counters and only artificial hangings were put in place of the flowers. Even at other places, mostly artificial flowers were put. In some of the grids, the flowers were missing, though they ought to have been decorated with flowers, and whatever flowers were put in the grids they were old one and of inferior quality. Contrary to discussions and agreement, there was no proper sitting lounge and the colour theme at the venue was found missing. The focus light was improper and lacked light colour. The mattresses and the white covers were in a very bad shape and dirty. As per understanding and agreement the venue had to be decorated and handed over by 6:30 pm. The guest were accordingly invited at 6:30 pm, the venue was handed over to the workers of the respondent well before time, but the work could not be finished till 8:30 pm. All the guest who were invited, had to wait for long hour at the Hotel Lobby. This also caused of unnecessary delay in Sagan Ceremony with the result great inconvenience and humiliation was caused to the complainant, his family members and the guests. This amounted to loss of face to the complainant and his family members, the photographs annex P/4 (A to N) filed with the complaint are in the nature of stark evidence of gross deficiency committed by respondent company.
iii.
Mehendi Ceremony/Ladies Sangeet was held on 05.05.2011 at Bridge Farm, Chattarpur, New Delhi of the respondent company. The theme and focus as agreed, was to be phoolkari and village theme. The colour of the theme was decided to be green.
Accordingly, the ladies of the family and the friends who attended the ladies functions were gifted with ladies suits and phulkari dupattas with matching bangles and bindies. But contrary to the agreement, no phulkari was visible at the venue. Instead of green colour matching village theme, blue colour was placed everywhere.
The carpet of whole street of the sitting lounge was of blue colour instead of green. Despite high consideration taken from the complainant, respondent used old and used decor. The venue was not made up to the desired standard and marks.
The table counters were found incomplete without proper finishing. The food stalls which were decided to be on cards and to be decorated with phulkari and marigold work were not there. The dripping of satin frills in front of tables was completely missing. Instead of gross (green) colour carpet, a blue colour was put which completely spoiled the theme and focus of the mehendi ceremony. When asked to explain the short comings the representatives of the respondent company disrupted the function by switching off the generator causing total darkness. It was only after the intervention of the local police authorities that the respondent switched on the generator. These events and happening caused a lot of inconvenience and humiliation to the complainant and his family members. The prestige of the complainant and his family was lowered in the eye of the guest and before the society at large.
4) Wedding Ceremony photographs of the Mehendi Ceremony (Ex.CW1/5(A-1) provide ample evidence of gross deficiency committed by OP. Due to gross deficiency committed by the OP in pre-wedding ceremonies, complainant and his family members were thoroughly disgraced and humiliated. The complainant was therefore constrainted to approach the respondent again and requested that arrangements for the wedding should be proper and inconformity with the terms and conditions of the agreement. Thereafter one Sh.
Rohit, representative of the respondent visited the complainant and fully assured him that everything would be in order. Sh. Rohit also in his hand written note reiterated the arrangements, which were to be done in wedding ceremony. Sh. Rohit agreed that in the stage there would be madhubani paintings on either side of the central grid, marigold hangings from the ceiling, round marigold balls and cylindrical orchids with little bit and marigold. In passage, there would be lotus props with marigold flowers ten numbers with rangoli.
In sitting lounge there would be three numbers of madhubani paintings and central grid. There would be twenty numbers of square tables with lighting and centre tables arrangements. In the VEDY, there would be arena sitting madhubani paintings, there would be four chawkies for parents sitting. In the entrance there would be madhubani paintings and rangoli in both the sides. Further, the artificial lake would be decorated with dias. Sh. Rohit to cover up the earlier lapses was asked by the respondent company to given a written assurance to complainant for arrangements of wedding function. To ensure that there were no lapses again, the complainant visited the venue of wedding but he was shocked to find that work had not commenced.
The complainant was asked to pay Rs. 2 Lac failing which no arrangements would be made. The situation was further aggravated when complainant received a sms from Sh. Rohit at 12.27 pm on 06.05.2011 that Sir 4:00 pm onwards Ill start removing set up, please do the rest payment till 4:00 pm. Having left with no alternative complainant was forced to pay aforesaid amount and obtaining receipt for the same. Complainant drew the attention of Sh. Rohit towards his post dated cheque bearing No. 401110 dt. 06.05.2011 amounting to Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Fifty Thousand Only) drawn on Indian Bank, Nehru Place, New Delhi and insisted that sudden demands of respondent were unreasonable and amounted to blackmail and arm-twisting........Moreover the demand enhanced the entire agreed amount of Rs. 8,75,000/- to Rs. 9.50 Lac. According to payment instructions for decor in the event prospectus, the balance 25% of the agreed consideration of 8.75 Lac had to be paid by the complainant on the day of wedding at the time of handing over the site. However, OP deliberately did not stick to their own instructions and coerced and forced the complainant for payment and received amount in advance and in turn, provided deficient services. Despite all assurances, during the wedding ceremony, where central theme was madhubani paintings and lotus, the same were found missing in the entire venue. This painting was also found missing in sitting launge the colour of event was agreed upon to be Radish, Magenta. However, the colourful voided to the venue was found purple. There was no flower at the stage nor was the grid properly decorated with marigold and orchid flowers. There was no proper entrance gate and passage. There was no rangoli in the passage and the entrance, as was agreed.
The lotus props were not decorated with flowers. Carpets used were dirty and very torn at placed madhubani paintings were found missing in all places including entrance gate, food counter and sitting lounge. The food stalls were also not properly decorated, the water bodies were not properly highlighted with the flowers as agreed, the Vedi was also not properly decorated. As per agreement, the grid should have been made of orchid and marigold flowers, which were found completely missing. However, the workers engaged by respondent did not hand over the site on the wedding day in time and continued working till arrival of barat i.e. up to 9:30 pm, which created a lot of harassment and humiliation to the complainant his family members and near relatives. Photographs of the wedding ceremony are annexed and marked as annexure P/6 (Colly).
Copy of hand written assurance of Sh. Rohit is marked as annexure P/7 copy of sms received from Sh. Rohit is annexed and marked as annexure P/8.
5) It is obvious that despite spending huge amount, complainant was subjected to huge humiliation a loss of face before the relatives, friends and guests. The relatives of complainants daughter also felt disgusted which caused great pain to complainant and his family members.
Complainant paid a sum of Rs. 08,01,000/- to the OP, but unfortunately, did not receive the agreed services. On account of serious acts of omissions, coercion, gross negligence and deficiency in service. Complainant was constrained to instruct his banker to stop the payment of the cheque No. 401110 dt. 06.05.2011 amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-.
Complainant also requested the OP not to deposit the said cheque vide his request letter dt. 06.05.2011 in as much as complainant was not liable to the said amount under agreed terms of job contract.
Even, otherwise, the OP was not entitled to receive the said amount on account of the fact that OP had coerced the complainant to pay amounts, which the respondent could not receive under the job contract. Totally dissatisfied and aggrieved complainant issued notice dt. 21.05.2011 to OP mentioning the various deficiencies and calling upon the respondent to compensate the complainant for the said deficiency. However, the respondent as a counterblast sent a reply dt. 19.05.2011 and legal notice dt. 21.05.2011. Thus, instead of returning the cheque for amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-, respondent deposited the same in the bank for collection and got the cheque dishonoured and issued a legal notice of demand date 04.06.2011 for the payment of cheque amount. Complainant sent a reply dt. 27.06.2011. The conduct of respondent thus amounted to gross deficiency of service and adoption of unfair trade practice. Copy of the notice dt. 06.05.2011 is annexed P/9, copy of the notice dt. 21.05.2011 is annexed P/10. Copy of reply of respondent dt. 19.07.2011 is annexed P/11. Copy of legal notice of respondent dt. 04.06.2011 is annexed P/12 and Colly.
6) Respondent filed reply/written statement. It was submitted that no cause of action ever arose and the complaint deserves to be dismissed with exemplary cost, the complaint was based on false and frivolous allegations. It was also based on concealment of material facts. It was specifically denied that total consideration for the event management was fixed at Rs. 8.75 Lac. On the basis of request made by the complainant Sh. Vikas Gutguttia, MD and Sh. Saswinder Singh, Senior Manager of the OP Company visited the house of the complainant. Again on the request of the complainant, they agreed to provide additional facilities/services subject to payment of charges. Consequently, the initial agreed amount of Rs. 8.75 Lac was raised to Rs. 9.55 Lac due to availing of additional facilities. Upon acceptance of the said additional charges the advance amounts were paid by the complainant and the job contract was confirmed. It was also denied that, it was even decided and agreed between the complainant and the representative of the respondent that entire decor of all the wedding function like Bhajan Sandhya, Sagan, Mehendi Ceremony/Ladies Sangeet and wedding shall be in accordance with the colour and theme of the wedding card. It was wrong and denied that after the said understanding of the parties regarding the colour and the decor of the wedding function, the job contract was confirmed.
As a matter of fact as thorough discussion with the officials of the company, complainant confirmed booking for the functions on 14.02.2011 and agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 8,75,000/- to the respondent company which were later on raised to Rs. 9,55,000/- due to availing additional services by the complainant. It was also agreed that entire payment will be made on the date of wedding i.e. on 06.05.2011. It was emphasized that whatever decoration were agreed the same were duly complied and while carrying out the decoration, it was false to alleged that promises and representation made were not complied and turned out to hollow and incorrect.
It was also denied that Sh. Jaswinder Singh Saran Senior Manager of the OP to whom the entire job was interested did not interact with the complainant while executing the job contract as a result of which mismanagement and chaos prevailed in all functions including the wedding. Allegations levelled by the complainant against the OP company were false, incorrect and concocted. On the contrary respondent company fulfilled all its commitments and promises.
7) It was submitted that no deficiency of service was committed by the OP in providing services agreed between the parties. Respondent company provided its best service which were duly appreciated by the guests and relatives of the complainant and that too when the complainant and his wife misbehaved with the officials of the OP company; rather it was respondent company who had suffered financially as the complainant has withheld due payment of Rs. 1,50,000/- and the OP had to filed a complaint under section 138 of the NI Act 1881 against the complainant. This complaint is pending in adjudication in the court.
Copy of the complaint alongwith documents are collectively marked as exhibit R-1/11.
8) It was submitted that it was not practicable to carry out the entire decoration of all the wedding functions in accordance with colour and theme of wedding card. The OP company never agreed for the same. As mentioned earlier the complainant confirmed the booking on 14.02.2011 and agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 8,75,000/- towards charges for carrying out the work which was later on increased to Rs. 9,55,000/- due to availing of additional services by the complainant. It was agreed that the complainant shall make entire payment on the day of wedding i.e. 06.05.2011. The complainant has resorted to falsehood and did not approach the court/Commission with clean hands, the OP committed no deficiency of service, rather it provided its best services. It was wrong to alleged that mattresses were in a bad shape. On the request of the complainant, the executives of the respondent company placed new mattresses at the site, proper decoration of the flower were made and all arrangements for the Bhajan Sandhya were made as per commitments. If at all there were some deviation, the same were due to the requests of the complainant and his wife, who had got the same done according to their choices and tastes. Whatever delay has been caused in handing over the venue site to the complainant, the same were totally attributable to the complainant. It was complainant and his wife who frequently instructed the staff of the OP to rearrange the decoration several times, just to satisfy their whims and fancies. It was the complainant and his wife who had without any reason and provocation misbehaved with the officials of the respondent. Wife of the complainant even slapped Ms. Komal Gill, employee of the OP company and one of the relatives of the complainant broke the glass on the table by paper weight. He created an ugly scene due to which the OP was compelled to call the police. When the police arrived at the venue the complainant and his wife realised their mistake and tendered their apologies to the officials of the OP Company. Due to misbehaviour and bad conduct of the complainant and his wife and his guests, the OP company was not willing to carry out the further decorations of the remaining functions but due to continuous request of the complaint and his commitments to pay the total agreed charges before taking possession of the site for wedding on 06.05.2011, the OP company agreed to carry out the functions. Moreover, the company was conscious of the fact that, the marriage of their daughter should not be spoiled due to misdeeds of her parents.
9) It was further submitted that although initial agreed charges were Rs. 8,75,000/- but later on as the respondent company had provided wedding venue at Brij Green Farm House, whose actual rent per day was Rs. 01,05,000/- on the request of the complainant as the complainant failed to find a proper place to conduct the wedding function and further the respondent company provided buffet layout at the community park, which was not initially agreed. Thus total charges were increased to Rs. 9.55 Lac as the OP company agreed to charged Rs. 50,000/- (inspite of Rs. 1.5 Lac for the Bridge Green Farm House) and Rs. 30,000/- for other additional works, such as layout at the community park. The agreed colour of the wedding was magenta or purple that was done in the entire set up.
It was further submitted that although the wedding venue was ready by 6:00 pm as agreed but due to sudden heavy rain with wind, the entire set up was spoiled due to which the same was re-erected by the OP. That too at additional cost but without charging any additional money from the complainant.
Complainant, however, instead of appreciating the said gesture of OP filed the present frivolous compliant on false grounds, which deserves to be dismissed with heavy cost.
10) The complaint filed the rejoinder in which he reiterated the allegations made in the complainant and refuted the claim made by the OP in written statement.
Parties led their evidence through affidavit and documents in support of their cases. At the fag end of the proceedings the complainant also filed additional documents which were taken on record. They also filed written arguments.
11) We have heard Sh. Abhijeet Bhujwal, Ld. Counsel for the Complainant and Sh. A.K.Goel, Ld. Counsel for the OP.
12) It was argued on behalf of the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant that well before 06.05.2011 scheduled wedding of her daughter, complainant approached FERNS N PETALS/FNP Events and Wedding Pvt. Ltd. for providing decoration services for various functions like Bhajan Sandhya, Sagan, Mehendi and finally wedding ceremony. The services of the respondent were thereby engaged, believing the representation of the representatives of the OP company true. As agreed, the managing director and senior manager visited the complainant and held vide discussions to finalise, the specifications of the various programmes. After receiving suggestions from Sh. Vikas Gutgutia and Sh. Jaswinder Singh Saran, senior manager ordered for the designing/printing of the wedding cards (Ex:CW1/1), which was incorporated with the theme of wedding functions based on the theme of Lotus Flower and Madhubani Paintings. It was agreed that the entire decor of all wedding functions shall be in accordance with the colour and theme of wedding ceremony. Only thereafter the job contract was confirmed on 14.02.2011. Function prospectus (Ex: CW1/2) was issued. The total consideration was fixed at Rs. 8.75 Lac and schedule of payment was mentioned. The last 25% of the total consideration was to be paid on the date of wedding function and at the time of handing over of the site. However, it was shocking to find that there were remarkable difference between promise and performance, although the OP instructed the decoration job of various wedding function to Sh. Jaswinder Singh Saran, senior manager, he did not fully interact with the complainant, as a result of which there was mismanagement and chaos in all the wedding functions. It was noteworthy that the name of Sh. Jaswinder Singh Saran found mention in the prospectus issued by the OP and he was given the job of supervising the arrangements. However, gross deficiency were found in the arrangements made in the Bhajan Sandhya (on 29.04.2011), Sagan Ceremony (on 04.05.2011), Mehendi Ceremony (on 05.05.2011) and finally wedding ceremony (on 06.05.2011). It was quite clear from the evidence on record that respondent company committed gross deficiencies in the pre-wedding functions. Therefore, Sh. Rohit was instructed to cover up the earlier lapes and assured that no such mismanagement would occurr in the wedding functions. To ensure timely completion and to avoid delay caused in the mehendi ceremony, the complainant visited the venue of the wedding and was shocked to find that no work had commenced and respondent asked for Rs. 2 Lac failing which it was threatened that no arrangement would be made. Having been faced with such a precarious predicament, which was further aggravated by receipt of sms (Ex: CW1/8) from Sh. Rohit on 12:27 pm on 06.05.2011 to the effect that Sir 4:00 pm onwards Ill start removing the set up, Please do the rest payment till 4 pm and in order to save the marriage function the complainant paid aforesaid amount, obtained receipt for the same as per agreement, the last balance consideration was to be paid only at the time of site hand over of the wedding function. The respondent did not act in a responsible and professional manner and asked for amounts as per their whims and fancies and the complainant was forced to succumb to the pressure. Complainant issued post dated cheque bearing No. 401110 dt. 06.05.2011 for Rs. 1.50 Lac upon being so insisted by the respondent. The conduct of the OP was pure blackmail and arm-twisting method in as much as the same would have the effect of enhancing the agreed amount of Rs. 8.75 Lac to Rs. 9.50 Lac. The OP further threatened that the set up would be removed. As per agreement/function prospectus issued, the respondent had to receive payments as per Payment Instructions for Decor. According to function prospectus the balance 25% of the agreed consideration of Rs. 8.75 Lac had to be paid by complainant, on wedding date at the time of the handing over of the site. The OP however, deliberately did not stick to their own instructions and coerced and forced the complainant to receive the amount in advance and in turn failed to provide services which they had agreed to provide. Our attention was drawn towards submissions made by the OP in written statement wherein it has been stated that the total consideration for providing services was increased up to Rs. 9.55 Lac from Rs. 8.75 Lac due to providing complainant venue for wedding function at Brij Green Farm House and other additional works such as buffet layout, which was not initially agreed.
It has been alleged that for the said purpose the respondent had charged additional amount of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 30,000/- respectively. It was absolutely false. Infact the complainant in his rejoinder has specifically refuted the said allegations of the respondent. As a matter of fact, the wedding function was held at Chabbra Farms owned and managed by Hotel Clarks Greens, which is supported by wedding card (Ex: CW1/1) and Function prospectus (Ex: CW1/2) issued by the respondent. In addition to the above piece of evidence, complainant had placed on record copy of money receipt dt. 06.05.2011 of Hotel Clarks Green (annex P/4), where under they have acknowledge the receipt of Rs. 46,400/- by cheque No. 401110 drawn on Indian Bank, New Delhi from the complainant towards charges of wedding function at Chabbra Farms. Apart from that in total violation of agreement and understanding between the parties and re-assurance given by Sh. Rohit in writing, in the wedding ceremony, where central theme was madhubani painting and lotus, the same were found missing. The colour of the function as agreed was radish magenta, the colour provided to the venue was surprisingly purple. No cylindrical orchid flower at the stage, nor was the grid properly decorated with the marigold and orchid flower. There was no rangoli in the passage of the stairs and lotus props were not in the good condition. The passage were provided with the dirty carpets. The madhubani painting was missing on the entire gate, food counter of the sitting lounge, stage were not properly finished. There were no proper flowers on the table, stage or the sitting lounge. Jaimala and milani mala were made of inferior quality of old flower, the food counters were not properly made. The water body were not properly highlighted with the dias as agreed. The Vedi was also not properly decorated, the gird should have been made by orchid and marigold flower. In addition there should have been hangings of orchid and marigold flowers which was completely missing. Moreover, the workers engaged by the respondent did not handover the site in the wedding day in time and continued working till arrival of barat i.e. up to 9.30 pm which created a lot of harassment and humiliation to the complainant and his family members. The mismanagement and chaos was writ large in the entire wedding functions as also in pre wedding functions; the OPs were guilty of gross deficiency of services and adopting unfair trade practice.
13) On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the OP/respondent argued that complainant did not approach this Commission with clean hands, the present complaint was filed with frivolous allegations and averments and that the complainant was not entitled for any relief. He emphasised that no harassment at all had been caused to the complainant. As a matter of fact, it was the respondent company who suffered financially as the complainant illegally with held payment of Rs. 1,50,000/- and that too despite filing a complaint under Section 138 of NI Act 1881. Another feature of the matter was that practically it was not possible to carry out entire decoration with the colour and them of the wedding card nor respondent company, ever agreed for the same. There was no deficiency of any kind committed on behalf of the respondent company.
14) The respondent company provided all the committed decoration and arrangements in the said functions and the same were duly appreciated by the complainant, his family members, relatives and guests. Whatever, delay has been caused in handing over the venue site to the complainant, the same was totally attributable to the complainant and his wife who frequently instructed the staff of the OP to re-arrange decoration several times to satisfy their whims and fancies. It was the complainant and his wife who without any provocation misbehaved with the officials of the OP. Complainants wife even slapped Ms. Komal, an employee of the OP. One relative of the complainant even broke the glass on the table and created ugly scene to the extent, the OP was compelled to call the police. Later on the complainant and his wife realised their mistake.
15) It was further argued that the complainant failed to keep his words by not making the payment of whole agreed amount; the official of the company was constrained to send sms to the complainant. Complainant was avoiding the payment of balance amount.
16) It was further important to note that initially agreed charges for the entire function was Rs. 8.75 Lac but later on, it was increased to Rs. 9.55 Lac as OP provided the wedding venue at Brij Green Farm House, whose actual rent per day was Rs. 1.5 Lac and further OP provided buffet layout at the community park which were not initially agreed. Taking a lenient view, the OP agreed to charge Rs. 50,000/- instead of Rs. 1.5 Lac for Brij Green Farm House and Rs. 30,000/- for additional work such as buffet layout at the community park.
17) The Ld. Counsel further submitted that although the wedding venue was ready by 6:00 pm as agreed, but due to sudden heavy rain with strong winds, the entire set up was spoiled and had to be re-erected on an additional cost. However, the OP did not charge any additional money from complainant, instead of appreciating the noble gesture, complainant filed this false and frivolous complaint. Service was rendered as per agreement and no deficiency in providing services was committed.
18) It has now to be seen whether any deficiency was actually committed on behalf of the respondent and whether they resorted to coercion and arm-twisting method?
19) The respondent in its written statement has alleged that the total consideration for providing services was increased to Rs. 9.55 Lac from Rs. 8.75 Lac on the ground that OP provided complainant the venue for wedding function at Brij Green Farm House and also did additional work such as buffet layout at Community Park on the day of wedding. For this purpose the OP had charged additional amount of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 30,000/- respectively. The counsel for the complainant submitted that the contention was absolutely false without an iota of truth. It has also been refuted in rejoinder affidavit. As a matter of fact, the wedding function was held at Chabra Farms owned and managed by Hotel Clarks Greens, New Delhi. These facts stand verified from the wedding card as well as function prospectus issued by the respondent (exhibit C1/1 exhibit C1/2).
20) Further complainant has also placed on record copy of money receipt dt. 06.05.2011 of Hotel Clarks Green (annex P/14) where under hotel has acknowledged the receipt of Rs. 46,400/- through cheque No. 40111 drawn on Indian Bank, New Delhi from the complainant towards the charges for the wedding functions at Chabbra Farms.
21) Due to alleged gross deficiencies committed during pre wedding ceremonies Sh. Rohit was asked by the OP to give a written assurance to the complainant to provide/make good arrangements in the wedding function Sh. Rohit through a hand-written note reiterated the arrangements which were to be provided in wedding ceremony.
To ensure timely and proper arrangements complainant visited the wedding venue, but was shocked to learn that work had not commenced. On enquiries complainant was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2 Lac failing which no arrangements were to be made; the situation was further aggravated when complainant received a sms (Ex: CW1/8) from the representative of Sh. Rohit at 12:27 pm on 06.05.2011 that from 4:00 pm onwards Ill start removing the set up, please do the rest payment till 4:00 pm. In order to save marriage function, the complainant was forced to pay the aforesaid amount and obtained receipt for the same. It is noteworthy that balance consideration was to be paid only at the time of site hand over of wedding function, but the complainant was coerced to make the payment as he was left with no alternative. The complainant issued post-dated cheque bearing No. 401110 dt. 06.05.2011 amounting to Rs. 1.50 Lac drawn on Indian Bank Nehru Place New Delhi. On the wedding day this unreasonable demand amounted to blackmail and arm-twisting method in as much as the same amounted to enhancing the entire agreed consideration from 8.75 Lac to 9.55 Lac.
It is relevant to note that as per agreement between the parties and function prospectus issued by the respondent, the OP had to receive payment in terms of payment instructions for the decor as mentioned therein. The balance 25% of the agreed consideration of Rs. 8.75 Lac had to be paid by the complainant on the day of wedding at the time of handing over of the site.
However, the OP coerced and compelled the complainant to make payment before handing over the site.
22) Thus the allegations made by the complainant were fully supported by documentary evidence on record. There was sufficient evidence to prove that the wedding function was held at Chabbra Farms and not at Brij Green Farm House as alleged by the OP. On the other hand OPs made bald and assertions without any evidence on sustainable basis. The OP was thus found to be deficient in providing services. The OP further resorted to unfair trade practice. The complaint therefore, succeeds and is liable to be decreed.
23) We therefore pass the following order:-
i.
The OP is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5 Lac by way of compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment as well as humiliation suffered by the complainant.
ii.
The OP shall further pay Rs. 20,000/- towards cost of litigation.
24) The payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the judgment failing which interest @ 9% p.a. shall have to be paid from the date of the order till the date of the actual payment.
25) Parties shall be provided with the copy of the judgment free of cost as per rules and there after file be consigned to record room.
(S.A.Siddiqui) Member (Judicial) (S.C.Jain) Member Fatima