Hotel Did Not Have Smoke Detector And Staffs Were Not Acquainted To Operate Fire Extinguishers; Deficiency in Service of Hotel; NCDRC Imposes Costs

The bench of National Commission comprising Justice C. Viswanath, Presiding Member and Ram Surat Ram Maurya, Member has observed that, the Hotel did not have smoke detector and the staffs of hotel were not acquainted to operate fire extinguishers. Negligence on the part of the hotel is proved. In this case, the deceased was serving as Sales Director in Riddhi Technology, Pvt Ltd. Vatva, Ahmedabad. In connection with his business tour, he booked a room in Hotel Lucky India. (Opposite parties). While he was sleeping, the fire broke out in the hotel, in which, three guests including deceased died due to burn injury and asphyxia due to inhalation of carbon-die-oxide and carbon-mono-oxide. Post mortem was done in which, cause of death was noted as "Asphyxia due to inhalation of carbon-die-oxide and carbon-mono- oxide, which might be due to accidental burn". Aggrieved by the act of hotel staff the heirs and dependants (complainants) of the deceased filed complaint before the National Commission directing the hotel to pay Rs.29,381,046.78 as compensation, for death of the deceased. Before the National Commission, the Hotel submitted that, the complaint involved complicated question of fact, which required oral evidence and cross-examination, which is not possible in summary proceeding. The issue for consideration before the National Commission was whether the Hotel is liable for the death of the deceased or not. Commission relied upon the case of Shyam Sunder Vs. State of Rajasthan, where it was held that, "the maxim "res ipsa loquitur" is resorted to when an accident is shown to have occurred and cause of accident is primarily within the knowledge of the defendant. The fact of the incident may, sometimes, constitute evidence of negligence committed by the defendant." Commission further relied upon the case of Syed Akbar Vs. State of Karnataka, where it was held that, "as a rule mere proof of an event has happened or an accident has occurred, the cause, which is unknown, in not evidence of negligence. But the peculiar circumstances, constituting the event or accident in particular case, may themselves proclaim in concordant, clear and unambiguous voice the negligence of some body as the cause of the event or accident. It is in such cases the maxim "res ipsa loquitur" may apply, if cause of the accident is unknown and no reasonable explanation as to the cause is coming from the defendant." Commission opined that, the plea that deceased was in deep sleep and did not respond when Hotel alerted the guests and hence deceased was guilty of contributory negligence, cannot be accepted. The incident took place at 4:00 hours. Sleeping of the guests in hotel at this time is usual. The deceased cannot be held as guilty of contributory negligence. Commission stated that, "the report of Officer In-Charge, Fire Station shows that the Hotel did not have smoke detector and the staffs of hotel were not acquainted to operate fire extinguishers. Negligence on the part of the opposite party in this respect is proved applying the maxim "res ipsa loquitur". Death of deceased in the Hotel due to burn injury and asphyxia and Hotel management has committed deficiency in service are proved." In view of the above, National Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed the Hotel to pay Rs.55,37,000/- with interest @6% per annum, from the date of death of deceased till the date of payment to the complainants within two months. Case Name: Gangadhar Shamandas Manglani & 4 Ors. v. Hotel Lucky India & Anr. Case No.: CONSUMER CASE NO. 373 OF 2014 Corum: Justice C. Viswanath, Presiding Member and Ram Surat Ram Maurya,Member Decided on: 1st July, 2022 Click Here To Read/Download Order

Hotel Did Not Have Smoke Detector And Staffs Were Not Acquainted To Operate Fire Extinguishers; Deficiency in Service of Hotel; NCDRC Imposes Costs

Mehak Dhiman

Tags