A Delhi-based wedding band company has been directed to pay ₹20,000 to a complainant after its members failed to turn up for a wedding, which led to a “delay in the [arrival of the] baraat [groom’s wedding procession]” causing embarrassment to the family.
City resident Vinod Kumar moved the district consumer disputes redressal forum alleging that despite paying a sum of ₹10,000 as an advance for services like providing lights, band and so on, the company — Pratap Band — failed to send its members on the day of the wedding.
“Despite repeated telephonic calls and visit to the office of the opposite party (OP), for sending the band, ghoda-baggi [horse buggy], lights and so on, no services — except mere bald assurances — were provided on the appointed day,” the complainant stated.
In the complaint, it was alleged that with the band members not turning up, “the baraat got delayed in reaching the marriage venue and the situation was an embarrassment” to the complainant and his family.
Holding the company deficient in services, the consumer panel stated: “We are of the opinion that the band provided deficient services to the complainant causing severe inconvenience and humiliation despite receiving ₹10,000 in advance for the services promised to be provided by it.” The complainant also claimed that the family had to hire services of another band by paying ₹50,000 as opposed to the ₹40,000, which was decided for the services of the Qutub Road-based Pratap Band.
Due to the lack of evidence pertaining to the escalated amount of ₹50,000, spent for the alternative band, the consumer panel, refused to accept the claim made by the complainant.
While levelling charges of “cheating” against the company, Mr. Kumar had sought compensation amounting to ₹20 lakh from the company.
Refusing to pass directions pertaining to the lodging of an FIR, the consumer panel said, “The complainant has raised specific allegations of cheating against the OP. The offence of cheating is triable by the court of competent jurisdiction… which are out of the purview of [relevant] consumer protection act.”
Directing the band company to refund the amount of ₹10,000 paid as advance, the consumer forum awarded an additional sum of ₹10,000 “on account of harassment meted out to the complainant”.
