S.K. TAING Vs. HOTEL SEALORD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these cross-appeals arise out of one order of State Commission; hence, decided by common order.

(2.) Appeal No. 73/2014 has been filed by the appellant/complainant and Appeal No. 247/2014 has been filed by OP/appellant against the order dated 9.12.2013 passed by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (in short, 'the State Commission') in Consumer Complaint No. CC/98/153 S.K. Taing Vs. Hotel Sealord and Hotel Sealord Vs. S.K. Taing by which, complaint was partly allowed and OP was directed to pay to complainant Rs.1,50,000/- towards medical treatment, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards compensation and Rs.50,000/- as cost of litigation.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that complainant was staying in OP No. 1 hotel in room no. 225 on second floor since 3.2.1998 Services of OP were not at all satisfactory. Rooms were not cleaned and nobody attended the room even after several calls. It was further submitted that on 6.2.1998, complainant along with his friend S.K. Bhandari came back to hotel at 1.50 a.m. and at that time there was no light in the hotel and it was pitch dark. There was no attendant or watchman in the hotel. There was no light/lamp or candle on the stairs or entrance or anywhere in the hotel. Complainant and his friend started walking through their senses, climbed stairs and were going to their room on the second floor. On reaching second floor, complainant felt a door like space with its shutter open and believing it to be the gate; the complainant stepped inside and started falling in a death trap. He fell down from the height of second floor to ground floor and became unconscious. It was further alleged that it was actually the lift door which was left open, unguarded and unlocked without any lift and without any warning or lamp. Complainant sustained grievous external and internal multiple injuries and fractures all over his body especially in his legs. During treatment in the hospital, a rod was fixed in complainant's right thigh at Bombay Hospital and Rs.75,000/- were spent on the operation. Complainant's family incurred expenses of lakhs of rupees on further treatment, medicines and travelling from Delhi to Mumbai on several occasions. It was further alleged that when complainant was lying on bed in the hospital in semi-conscious state, OP's representative obtained signatures of complainant on some paper written in regional language under the pretext of completing some hospital formalities. It was further submitted that even after lapse of two months, complainant was not able to stand on his legs. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint before State Commission. OP resisted complaint and submitted that OP's hotel is repudiated hotel, catering to the needs of Indian and foreign guests belonging to the middle class since last 13 years. It was admitted that complainant checked in OP hotel on 3.2.1998. It was further submitted that in the intervening night of 5th and 6th Feb., 1998, complainant along with his associate Mr. Bhandari entered in OP hotel fully drunk. Their legs were rambling, eyes were looking reddish and they were using abusive language while talking with each other. The receptionist stopped them at the gate and asked them to sit down in the lobby as due to power failure in the area, the electricity lights were off for some time. OP put candles and lights everywhere on ground floor, stair case and upper floor. Receptionist of the hotel asked complainant and his friend not to climb staircase till proper lighting arrangement is made even then both of them tried to go up from stairs. After some time, all of a sudden, there was a sound from the staircase of rolling down of some person who was found to be the complainant, the staff of hotel rushed and rendered help. In the meantime, Director, Ramkumar Khanna came on the spot and took the complainant to Bombay Hospital and deposited Rs.20,000/- in the hospital for complainant's treatment. It was further submitted that during the stay in the hospital, OP management took full and proper care of the complainant. Police report was recorded immediately on the day of the incident in which it was mentioned that there was accidental fall of the complainant from the staircase. It was further submitted that this statement was recorded by police in presence of Mr. Bhandari, the complainant's associate. OP denied any negligence and prayed for dismissal of complaint and also submitted that OP owed amount of Rs.20,000/- from the complainant which he promised to pay. Learned State Commission after hearing both the parties allowed complaint as mentioned earlier against which both parties filed appeals.