DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Event venue shifted, banquet hall owner fined for denying refund

Chandigarh, July 8 The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, has directed SS Farms, located on the Kharar-Landran Road in Mohali to pay a compensation of Rs 10,000 to a city resident for not refunding booking amount of a...
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
Advertisement
Advertisement

Chandigarh, July 8

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, has directed SS Farms, located on the Kharar-Landran Road in Mohali to pay a compensation of Rs 10,000 to a city resident for not refunding booking amount of a function, whose venue was shifted due to Covid. The commission also directed to the banquet hall to pay Rs 7,000 litigation cost along with the booking amount of Rs 40,000 with interest.

Advertisement

Covid curbs

  • Sunil Kumar Thakur of Mani Majra booked SS Farms for his daughter’s wedding
  • Due to Covid curbs, number of guests restricted to 20; he got permission for 50
  • Hall owner refused to allow 50 guests; denied refund of Rs 40,000 booking amount
  • Commission told him to refund it with 9% interest, pay Rs 10,000 fine, Rs 7,000 litigation costs

Sunil Kumar Thakur of New Indira Colony, Mani Majra, claimed on December 14, 2020, he booked the hall for the wedding of his daughter scheduled on April 25, 2021, but due to Covid curbs the number of guests was restricted to 20.

He claimed he got permission from the SDM, Kharar, for a gathering of 50 guests, but the hall owner refused to allow the same and forced him to make alternative arrangements.

Advertisement

Thakur then demanded a refund of the booking amount, but the owner refused and claimed he made alternative arrangements for the wedding near the complainant’s house and the booking amount was adjusted. The commission said there was no evidence to prove that the owner made any such arrangements. He even failed to reply to the legal notice sent by the complainant, alleging deficiency in service on part of the OP.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Classifieds tlbr_img2 Videos tlbr_img3 Premium tlbr_img4 E-Paper tlbr_img5 Shorts