ORDER (D.M.YADAV, MEMBER)
The present complaint is being disposed off by me in accordance with the provisions of Section 64 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
2. Brief facts of the present complaint are that the complainant is an Advocate and is practising at District & Sessions Court, Narnaul. On 26.06.2024, he along with his junior Advocate and driver went to Jaipur for attending the courts at Banipark, Jaipur and after completing the court work at Jaipur, in the
1
way, they stopped their Car at the hotel of the opposite party and placed an order for food. The waiter serving at the hotel of the opposite party also placed packaged drinking water but the complainant asked him to provide only the simple drinking but he refused to serve the simple drinking water. Thus, there was no option for the complainant except to consume the packaged drinking water along with the food. The complainant paid under protest a total sum of Rs.1038/- including
28.57 P for packaged drinking water vide Bill No.52901 dated 26.06.2024 through Phone Pay vide Transaction ID No.T2406261554176167043405. In this way, the opposite party has charged a sum of Rs.28.57 P from the complainant for packaged drinking water wrongly and illegally. The complainant also served a registered legal notice dated 28.06.2024 to the opposite party but of no use. Thus, the above said act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on its party. The complainant prayed that the opposite party may be directed to refund the price of the packaged drinking water of Rs.28.57 along with compensation of Rs.1.00 Lakh as well as cost of litigation.
3 Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite party through registered post. But the opposite party did not appear before this Commission despite service and thus, it was proceeded against exparte vide order dated
29.08.2024
4 In support of his case, learned counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence the affidavit of complainant as Annexure CW/A, legal notice as Annexure C-1, original postal receipt as Annexure C-2, copy of tracking record of consignment of postal article as Annexure C-3, Bill/Invoice dated 26.06.2024
2
as Annexure C-4, copy of details of UPI transaction as Annexure C-5, Aadhaar Card of complainant as Annexure C-6 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.
5 I have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the evidence and case file carefully and minutely.
6 Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that after placing order for food at the hotel of the opposite party, the complainant asked the waiter for drinking water but the waiter provided packaged bottle of water. The complainant again asked for tap water for drinking free of cost but the waiter refused to provide the same. Learned counsel for the complainant further contended that the opposite party was deliberately not providing free drinking water to the consumers thereby forcing them to buy packaged drinking water, by paying extra money thereby practicing unfair trade practice causing great hardship and inconvenience to the customers visiting the hotel. Therefore, complainant having no other choice but to approach this Commission for redressal of his grievances. In support of his case, learned counsel for the complainant has placed reliance on a case law titled as Rupasi Multiplex Vs Mautusi Chaudhuri & Ors in Revision Petition No.3972 of 2014 decided on 10.08.2015 by the Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi.
7 After hearing the learned counsel for the complainant and perusing the entire case file, it is established on record that the complainant had visited the hotel of the opposite party on 26.06.2024 and he had taken food and the
3
opposite party had charged a sum of Rs.1038/- from the complainant including the cost of one packaged drinking water bottle Rs.28.57/-. The version of the complainant is that the despite demanding water for drinking free of cost, the opposite party did not provide the same rather forced him to buy mineral drinking water by paying extra money.
I am in agreement with the argument of learned counsel for the complainant that it is the right of the complainant as a consumer to be served with drinking water free of cost as it is basic necessity which is required to be provided by the hotel to its customers. The complainant in his affidavit reiterated the allegations made in the complaint and asserted that despite his repeated demands made, he was not provided drinking water by the staff of the opposite party. He further insisted that the staff of the hotel insisted upon him to buy packaged drinking water by paying extra money, if at all he needs water to drink. I do not find any reasons for the complainant to make false allegations against the opposite party. I also find support from the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble National Commission in the case law Rupasi Multiplex (Supra). Even the Indian Sarais Act, 1867 enjoined upon a keeper of Sarai to keep and provide free drinking water fit for consumption to the persons who stay in these Sarais and Inns. When drinking water is provided free by a Sarai then the hotels or eating places must have the courtesy to provide free drinking water where the consumers pay for the food giving a boost to the sales of such hotels and restaurants.
4
In the present case the opposite party even did not appear before this Commission and thus, it was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 29.08.2024 and the evidence led by the complainant remained unrebutted and unchallenged, hence, certainly complainant is entitled to the relief.
8 In view of my above discussion and observation and considering the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble National Commission in the above referred case law, I hold that the opposite party has no respect for the notice of this Commission then what to talk about his attitude towards his customers/consumers. His callous and lackadaisical attitude can very well be fathomed by not responding the notice of this Commission.
9 Resultantly, in view of my above discussion and observation, I accept the present complaint and the opposite party is saddled with the liability to pay Rs.50,000/- for the mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant and Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses. The opposite party is further directed to refund the price of the bottle i.e. Rs.28.57 Paise to the complainant along with interest @ 9 % per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint till its actual realization. The above said order be complied with within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. If the above said order is not complied with within the above stipulated period by the opposite party, the complainant shall also be entitled to file an application u/s 71 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and in that eventuality the opposite party may also be liable for prosecution u/s 72 (1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which envisages imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one month, but which may
5
extend to three years, or with fine, which shall not be less than twenty-five thousand rupees (Rs.25,000/-), but which may extend to one lakh rupees (Rs.1.00 Lakh) or with both. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance. Announced (D.M.Yadav)
Dated: 25.11.2024 Member,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission,
Narnaul.
6