Trip Cancellation, Chandigarh Commission Orders The Club Resorto Hospitality To Refund Amount, Pay Compensation And Litigation Cost

Brief Facts:

Ravinder Pal Singh and Sarbjit Kaur (“Complainants”) availed services from the Club Resorto Hospitality Limited (“the Club”) which was involved in arranging tour packages and hotel bookings. On a specific date, representatives from the Club informed the complainant about a meeting at J.W. Mariott (“Hotel”). During this meeting, the representatives of the Club offered a five-year membership to the complainants for a fee of ₹75,000, which the complainants paid. They subsequently received a membership certificate and confirmation of the payment.

Later, the representatives of the Club offered a complimentary three-day trip to Ramsheher Fort for the complainants' marriage anniversary. However, the Club cancelled the trip at the last minute, citing bad weather and road blockage. The complainants got to know that the weather and road conditions were fine and that the fort was fully booked. When they questioned the Club about this, they received no satisfactory explanation. The Club’s representative also promised to visit the complainants on their anniversary day but did not show up, causing humiliation and mental distress. The complainants requested a refund of the ₹75,000 membership fee via email, with reminders sent later, but received no response. Consequently, alleging a deficiency in service and unfair trade practices, the complainants filed a consumer complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Chandigarh (“District Commission”)

The Club responded to the consumer complaint by raising several preliminary objections. They argue that the complaint is not maintainable, alleging that the complainants have concealed important facts and that the jurisdiction for such disputes is exclusively in New Delhi according to the membership package rules. Additionally, the Club claims that the complainants have filed a frivolous complaint with distorted facts to mislead the District Commission.

Observations of the Commission:

The District Commission started by recognising the central issue which was whether the Club and its representatives failed to provide the promised services, specifically a three-day trip to a fort on the complainants' anniversary, which was cancelled due to alleged bad weather and road blockage. The District Commission perused the affidavits presented by the complainants to argue that the Club did not provide the promised services, and they are entitled to a refund. The bench observed that despite the Club disputing the allegations in their written response, they failed to provide any evidence to counter the complainants' claims.

Based on the evidence presented, the District Commission concluded that the Club received the membership fee but failed to deliver the promised services. Therefore, the consumer complaint was deemed valid, and the complainants were held entitled to a refund of the membership fee along with interest and compensation. In light of the aforementioned observations, the Club was ordered to refund Rs. 75k to the complainants along with Rs. 7,000 as compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs. 7,000 for litigation costs.

Case Title: Ravinder Pal Singh and Anr. vs The Club Resorto Hospitality Ltd. and others

Case No.: Consumer Complaint No. CC/251/2020

Advocate for the Complainants: Sh. Tushar Arora

Advocate for the Respondent: None

Click Here To Read/Download Order