A. RAJASEKARAN Vs. MALLIGA THIRUMANA MANDAPAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal filed under Sec. 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (in short, 'the Act') assails the order dtd. 16/11/2021 passed by the Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai (in short, 'the State Commission') in CC no. 142 of 2017.

(2.) Appellant booked the respondent's marriage hall on 12/7/2016 for a marriage events on 7/9/2016 and 8/9/2016 by paying an advance of Rs.10,000.00 against receipt. On 13/8/2016, the appellant booked a new mandapam. On 17/8/2016, the appellant learnt of another event to be held at the Malliga Thirumana Mandapam on the same date. Respondent informed that he would verify the same but did not revert. On 18/8/2016, they approached the respondent who, admitted that despite advance he had booked the hall for 7/9/2016 and 8/9/2016 by mistake and failed to make entries in the Register which led this situation.

(3.) On 18/8/2016, the appellant booked another marriage hall by the name S P D Mahal at a rent of Rs.50,000.00 including all charges. To compensate the appellant, the respondent assured that he would pay the entire charges i.e., Rs.50,000.00 since the mistake was entirely on his part. Due to the acts of the respondent, the respondent provided deficiency in service which caused irreparable loss and injury apart from mental agony. The appellant also suffered loss of Rs.13,500.00 by way of booking rooms for guests and Rs.15,000.00 by way of invitations distributed. Appellant issued a lawyer's notice on 30/8/2016 received by the respondent on 2/9/2016 which was not replied. Complaint no.142 of 2017 was filed before the State Commission, Chennai.