District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC), Thoothukudi: While considering the instant complaint wherein it was alleged that due deficient services and unfair trade practices committed by OYO, the complainant’s sister’s dream of getting admission in a National Law University (NLU) in the year 2022, were shattered; the Bench of A. Thiruneela Prasad (President), N. Namachivayam and A. Sankar (Members) found OYO to be liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices and directed them to pay compensation amounting to 16 Lakhs to the complainant and his sister for shattering her dreams of getting admission in a NLU for the academic session of 2022.
Background: After completing her 12th standard, the complainant’s sister started preparing for the All India Law Entrance Test (AILET), 2022 through an online private coaching center, Career Launcher in order to achieve her dream to take admission in a National Law University and become a law aspirant. The complainant stated that to seek her goal, his sister studied hard to balance her school studies and preparation for AILET entrance exam.
AILET 2022 was to be held on 26-6-2022 from 10 AM to 11:30 AM. The examination center allocated to complainant’s sister was in Chennai, Tamil Nadu. Therefore, to attend the exam, the complainant and sister travelled from Kovilpatti to Chennai and further booked an OYO room in a hotel listed in Chennai through OYO Rooms’ official app. The check-in date was 25-6-2022, 12 PM and check-out date was 27-6-2022, 11 AM. The payment for 2 days of stay amounted to Rs 1175 and the same was paid by the complainant via UPI on 24-6-2022.
On 25-6-2022, the complainant and his sister reached the listed OYO hotel around 10:45 AM. However, when they reached the hotel, the reception informed them that the hotel management had asked OYO Rooms to delist their property from OYO App and that the hotel had to turn back guests for past 1 week due to OYO’s irresponsible act.
Thereafter the complainant checked his phone where he saw a text message from OYO dt 25-6-2022 at 9 AM, wherein they had informed the complainant regarding change of booking and asked him to select a new hotel. The hotel receptionist tried to reach OYO official of their area, but he did not pick up the call. Resorting to OYO customer care numbers did not prove to be fruitful either. It was stated that since the complainant went to Chennai to accompany his sister to the entrance exam, he therefore was not in the state of mind to tackle the fraudulent activities of OYO and hence moved to another OYO listed hotel. However, once the complainant and his sister reached the alternate hotel, the receptionist informed them that the complainant’s booking details were not forwarded to them.
It was stated that despite going through deep mental agony due to afore-stated events, the complainant booked another OYO room on 25-6-2022 and paid Rs. 1066 for the same. However, when they reached the 3rd hotel, the receptionist demanded an additional payment of Rs 600 or face cancellation of their booking. With no relief in sight, the complainant had to pay the additional amount. Furthermore, when the complainant and his sister entered the allocated room, they discovered it to be in extremely unkempt condition, so much so that the pair had to check out on 26-6-2022 (day of the exam) at 7:30 AM.
After returning to their hometown, the complainant e-mailed his ordeal and made a complaint to OYO customer support and sought refund of the booking amounts. Receiving a reply after 22 days, the complainant was instructed to file a complaint to another OYO associated e-mail that handles complaints from India. The complainant did as instructed, but he neither received any reply nor any refund.
Hence the complainant alleged that due to nefarious activities committed by OYO, and their intention of making illegal profits, his sister could not focus on her entrance exams and received low marks and could not achieve her dream of getting admission in a NLU, thereby wasting 1 year of hard work and preparation.
Commission’s Assessment:
Perusing the facts of the case and evidence presented by the complainant, the Commission noted that in a consumer complaint the onus to prove deficiency in services lies with the complainant who alleges such deficiency. The Commission pointed out that in the instant case, the complainant, with sufficient material evidence, proved deficiency in the services provided by OYO and the listed Guest House booked by the complainant.
The Commission further noted the failure of Opposite Parties to appear before the DCDRC to disprove the case. Therefore, the DCDRC concluded that the complainant satisfactorily proved the alleged deficiency in services and unfair trade practice on part of OYO and the listed guest house, which resulted in the complainant’s sister not being able to have a steady mind while giving AILET exam and thereby losing her chance to get admission in a NLU in 2022.
Considering the issue related to compensation, the Commission directed the Opposite Parties to refund a sum of Rs 6797 towards booking amount and travel expenses of the complainant; pay Rs 1,23,000 vis-a-vis redoing law coaching course fee expense of complainant’s sister; pay a sum of Rs 10 Lakhs as compensation for shattering the complainant’s sister dreams and aspirations; sum of Rs. 5 Lakhs as compensation for unfair trade practices and Rs 10,000 as costs of litigation.
[M. Gowtham v. Ritesh Agarwal, CC No. 39 of 2024, decided on 25-7-2024]
Order by A. Thiruneela Prasad (President)
Advocates who appeared in this case:
Appearing for complainant- S. Saravanan, Adv.
Great judgment by consumer forum. Better the compensation should have been 5 crore , so the person will not have to work for the rest of his life
Disproportionate Compensation in Consumer Disputes: A Critical Look at the DCDRC Order
A recent order by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC) raises concerns over the proportionality of compensation awarded. In a case involving a booking dispute with OYO Rooms, the Commission directed the Opposite Parties to pay a total of over Rs. 16 Lakhs, including Rs. 10 Lakhs for shattering the complainant’s sister’s dreams and aspirations, Rs. 5 Lakhs for unfair trade practices, and other compensations related to booking and redoing coaching fees.
While consumer protection is paramount, this award appears disproportionate given the nature of the dispute—a booking failure. The compensation for emotional distress, amounting to Rs. 10 Lakhs, seems excessively high compared to the actual harm caused. Compensation should aim to restore the complainant to the position they would have been in without the wrongdoing, rather than penalizing the service provider to an exaggerated degree.
Such judgments can create a dangerous precedent, where service providers are burdened with exorbitant penalties for errors that do not warrant such punitive measures. While fairness and deterrence are essential in consumer disputes, the compensation should remain reasonable and justifiable.
In light of this, a more balanced approach to awarding damages is necessary to maintain confidence in the consumer redressal mechanism. Otherwise, excessive compensation awards may undermine the credibility of the system and encourage frivolous litigation, with parties hoping for outsized payouts for minor grievances.