Kangra District Commission Holds Vibrill Hospitality Liable For Failure To Issue Holiday Confirmations Despite Receiving Payment

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kangra (Himachal Pradesh) bench of Hemanshu Mishra (President), Arti Sood (Member) and Narayan Thakur (Member) held Vibrill Hospitality Limited for its failure to issue the confirmation of the holiday scheme despite the Complainant paying Rs. 69,000/- and for not refunding the money when requested. Brief Facts: Vibrill Hospitality Limited (“Vibrill”) initially contacted the Complainant, proposing a scheme for holiday stays in various hotels. Subsequently, a meeting was arranged at Clarks Hotel Kangra where Vibrill presented details of a membership in the Vibrill scheme. The membership was priced at Rs. 1,65,000/-, with an initial down payment of Rs. 69,000/-. The Complainant agreed to these terms and transferred the down payment via Google Pay, expecting to receive a membership kit and confirmation letter within 15 days. In February 2023, the Complainant planned a trip to Shimla based on assurances from Vibrill but did not receive the promised confirmation letter despite repeated requests. Consequently, the trip had to be cancelled which resulted in disappointment and inconvenience to the Complainant and his family. Subsequently, after several attempts to contact Vibrill, including emails and phone calls by the Complainant's son, a communication informed them that Rs. 19,425/- would be deducted for cancellation and bank charges, and the remaining Rs. 49,575/- would be refunded. However, the refund was not received within the stipulated time which prompted the Complainant to contact Vibrill numerous times via mobile calls and WhatsApp messages. Initially, responses were received, but communication ceased at a later stage. Feeling aggrieved by the lack of service and refund delay, the Complainant approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kangra, Himachal Pradesh (“District Commission”) and filed a consumer complaint against Vibrill. Vibrill didn't appear before the District Commission for proceedings. Observations by the District Commission: The District Commission noted that the Complainant paid Vibrill an amount of Rs. 69,000/- but no confirmation letter was issued as promised. Consequently, two planned trips were cancelled by the Complainant due to the non-availability of the necessary documentation which caused significant inconvenience to the Complainant and his family. The District Commission held that since Vibrill failed to issue a confirmation letter, it cannot justify deductions from the refund amount. Despite Vibrill's assurance that a partial refund would be made after deducting Rs. 19,425/-, no refund was processed. The District Commission held that this delay, coupled with Vibrill's initial inducement and subsequent failure to fulfil promises, constituted unfair trade practices. Therefore, the District Commission ordered Vibrill to refund the entire amount of Rs. 69,000/- to the Complainant along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. Additionally, Vibrill was directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- to the Complainant for the inconvenience caused and pay Rs. 10,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by the Complainant. Case Title: Kamal Nain vs Managing Director Vibrill Hospitality Limited Case Number: Consumer Complaint No. 93/2024 Date of Pronouncement: June 3rd, 2024 Click Here To Read/Download Order

Kangra District Commission Holds Vibrill Hospitality Liable For Failure To Issue Holiday Confirmations Despite Receiving Payment

Smita Singh

Tags