Chandigarh District Commission Holds J.W. Marriott Liable For Retaining Full Booking Amount Despite Valid Cancellation Due To Unforeseen Circumstances

Update: 2024-04-16 12:00 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held J.W. Marriott Hotel liable for unfair trade practice for retaining full payment of the booking amount even after cancellation due to unforeseen circumstances endured by the customer. The cancellation was in line with the facilitator's...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held J.W. Marriott Hotel liable for unfair trade practice for retaining full payment of the booking amount even after cancellation due to unforeseen circumstances endured by the customer. The cancellation was in line with the facilitator's (MakeMyTrip) terms and conditions.

Brief Facts:

The Complainant booked a hotel room for his son through MakeMyTrip with J.W. Marriott Hotel Chandigarh, paying Rs. 13,574/-. However, due to the death of the Complainant's brother, he approached MakeMyTrip to cancel the reservation for his son with the hotel for the same day. Despite sending an email for cancellation as requested, MakeMyTrip and the hotel delayed refunding the amount, despite numerous communications from the Complainant. The Complainant made several communications with MakeMyTrip and the hotel but didn't receive any satisfactory response. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant approached District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh (“District Commission”) and filed a consumer complaint against MakeMyTrip and the hotel.

In response, MakeMyTrip stated that it is a mere facilitator between service providers and guests, obligated to provide confirmed hotel bookings. It stated that once bookings are confirmed by service providers, it shares details with customers like the Complainant, who receive all necessary information about the hotel. It disclaimed liability for any deficiencies in the hotel's service, stating that it fulfilled its obligations. It pointed out that the User Agreement with the Complainant absolved it of responsibility for deviations in service standards.

The hotel argued that the complaint was not maintainable as the booking's terms and conditions clearly stated that the booking was non-refundable. It contended that this condition, set by MakeMyTrip, was accepted by the Complainant. Even if the booking were made directly with the hotel, the Complainant would still be obligated to inform the hotel 24 hours in advance to be entitled to any refund, as per the hotel's terms and conditions.

Observations by the District Commission:

The District Commission noted that the room in question was booked by the Complainant with the hotel through MakeMyTrip, and subsequently cancelled by the Complainant due to an emergency involving a death in his family. This rendered him unable to utilize the services of the hotel. The District Commission held that the email received by the Complainant stated that the booking was confirmed for a specific date range, with free cancellation until the day before the scheduled stay. Despite the efforts made by MakeMyTrip to secure a full refund for the Complainant, the District Commission noted that the hotel, through its communication, insisted on retaining the full payment, stating its cancellation policy. However, the District Commission held that the cancellation arose due to an unforeseen and unavoidable circumstance, namely the death of the Complainant's brother, which was duly communicated to the hotel. It held that the hotel's refusal to acknowledge the genuine request for a refund, given the circumstances, amounted to both deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

Consequently, the District Commission directed the hotel to refund the sum of Rs. 13,574/- to the Complainant, along with interest calculated at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of cancellation of the booking onwards. It was also directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- to the Complainant for the mental agony and harassment caused along with Rs. 5,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by him.

Case Title: Rajinder Kumar Gupta vs MakeMyTrip

Click Here To Read/Download Order


Tags:    

Similar News