9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 1487X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver, the Complainant has not made any allegation of deficiency in service on his part and has failed to establish any personal involvement of him in the alleged deficiency. In the case of Amarjit Singh Vs. Gagandeep Singh Ors. - [ 2016 (12) TMI 1896 - NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI ] while dealing with the question Whether the Ex-Secretary or the Ex-President or other office bearers of any Cooperative Credit Society fall within the category of the Service Provider , a three Judges Bench of this Commission has held that that Ordinarily Ex-Secretary or the Ex-President or other office bearers of any Cooperative Credit Society shall not fall within the category of service providers in respect of any dealing of the depositors with such society. In the case in hand, since no evidence has been produced by the Complainant to prove that Mr. Yogesh Deveshwar was personally involved or was relating to any alleged deficiency of service, we are of the considered view that he has been improperly joined as a party and his name is liable to be struck out from the array of the parties. As such, the application seeking impleadment of Mr. Sanjiv Puri who has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant : For the Complainant : In person For the Opp. Party : For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate and Mr. L.K. Bhushan, Ms. Aditi Awasthy and Mr. Srinivasan Ramaswamy, Advocates with him. ORDER The present Complaint, under Section 12 read with Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the Act ), has been filed by the Complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Parties, i.e. Yogesh Deveshwar, Chairman, ITC Company Ltd. and ITC Ltd. in cutting and treatment of her hairs at the Salon of Hotel ITC Maurya and medical negligence in hair treatment. 2. Briefly put, facts relevant for the disposal of the Consumer Complaint are that the Complainant, Ms. Aashna Roy was to appear before an Interview Panel. On 12.04.2018, a week before the interview, she visited to the Salon of Hotel ITC Maurya, New Delhi (Group of ITC Hotels) for hairstyling to have a clean and groomed appearance before the Interview Panel. She asked for hairdresser, namely, Alem who used to cut her hairs on various visits to Salon. But since, she was not available in the Salon, another hairdresser, namely, Christine, was told to do the hairstyli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... treatment under the supervision of Alem. She agreed for that as the Hotel staff convinced her that Vicky is trained and very good in his work. However, during the hairs treatment, her hairs and scalp got completely damaged with excess ammonia and there was lot of irritation in the scalp. Complainant asserted that the hairdresser scratched and cut her entire scalp with his nails on the pretext that he was doing this exercise to open the hair cuticles. But, when he put the cream which was laden with ammonia, her scalp got burnt. On complaint, they put hair spray which gave her only temporary relief. After the treatment, the heirs of the Complainant became hard and rough and she was not able to even run her fingers through it. Her scalp also started irritating and burning again and again. She tried to seek the assistance of the Hotel staff in the matter but they were abusive, rude and disrespectful. She was even threatened to face consequences on visit to ITC Maurya. 5. Ultimately, Complainant approached the Management of ITC Group and Hotels and apprised them of the incident but in vein. Feeling aggrieved, Complainant has filed the present Complaint alleging deficiency in service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nreasonably high and exaggerated compensation. The team at the Salon which provided the services of hairstyling and hair treatment to the Complainant is good and welltrained by Moehair Experts. Ms. Christine Hou who did the hair-cutting of the Complainant has 27 years of experience and she is well known for hair-styling. Mr. Vicky Kumar who did the treatment of the Complainant has 12 years of experience and has been doing similar treatments at Ashoka Hotel, Samrat Hotel, Janpath Hotel and several other Salons. He is specially trained by Moehair Experts for the given hair treatment. Moehair is an American brand that takes pride in pioneer hair solutions all around the globe. The products of Moehair are approved by American Federation of Hairdressers. The Moehair keratain treatment given to the Complainant is a deep conditioning protein based organic treatment which removes waves and naturally straighten hairs giving it a longer look. The product of Moe Hair Pure was not applied on the scalp of the Complainant but it was applied only on the hair strand, leaving one inch from the root of the hair. The Product applied on the scalp of the Complainant is sulphur and ammonia free. The tre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ey all have supported the narration of the Opposite Parties. They have also filed photographs of the Complainant before and after hair cut as appearing in the CCTV footage of the Hotel. 12. During the course of the proceedings, the Opposite Party No.1, namely Yogesh Deveshwar had expired on 11.05.2019 and application was filed by the Complainant for impleadment of Mr. Sanjiv Puri who has been appointed as the Chairman of ITC Company Ltd. on his place. The said application has been contested by the Opposite Party No.2 by filing its reply to the application. 13. Heard both the parties on the Application seeking impleadment of Mr. Sanjiv Puri who has taken the Charge as Chairman and Managing Director of ITC Ltd. after the death of Mr. Yogesh Deveshwar, Opposite Party No.1. 14. Learned Counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties rigorously contended that the Written Statement was filed by Yogesh Deveshwar taking objection of arraying him as Opposite Party No.1 and making a prayer for deletion of his name from the array of the parties on the grounds that: (i) he was non-executive Chairman of the Opposite Party No.2 and was not a service provider under the Act; (ii) the Complain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Mr. Sanjiv Puri is neither a proper nor necessary party and is not liable to the Complainant for the alleged claim in any manner whatsoever. Mr. Sanjiv Puri had taken the charge of Chairman and Managing Director of ITC Ltd.. Opposite Party NO. 2 on 13.05.2019 after the death of Mr. Yogesh Deveshwar on 11.05.2019. Mr. Yogesh Deveshwar was the nonexecutive Chairman of the Opposite Party No.2 and was not involved in its day to day operations or management. Moreover, the Complainant has not made any allegation of deficiency in service on his part and has failed to establish any personal involvement of him in the alleged deficiency. In the case of Amarjit Singh Vs. Gagandeep Singh Ors. - (Revision Petition No. 2512 to 2518 of 2011 decided on 19.12.2016) while dealing with the question Whether the Ex-Secretary or the Ex-President or other office bearers of any Cooperative Credit Society fall within the category of the Service Provider , a three Judges Bench of this Commission has held as under:- 19. In view of the discussion above, we answer the reference as follows:- 1. Ordinarily Ex-Secretary or the Ex-President or other office bearers of any Cooperative Credit Socie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ong flicks/layers covering her face in the front and at the back and 4 inch straight hair trim from the bottom, Christine had chopped of her entire hair leaving only 4 inch from the top touching her shoulders. She complained about that to the management of the Salon and they offered her a free hair treatment from Moehair which was to be repeated for 23 washes. But the hair treatment given by them was dubious and it resulted in damage of her hairs. Her scalp was burnt with severe burning sensation due to hair treatment and there was itching and flaking of the scalp. The Chemical used in her hair treatment, has caused permanent damage to her scalp. Therefore, she went to Dr. Ranjit Kumar Dass, MBBS for medical treatment. In his Certificate, he has stated that Aashna Roy has been suffering harsh chemical treatment on her hair-greying hair, scalp infection, dryness and itching as well as hair loss and she is advised to renew medication. She brought the incident to the notice of the Higher Authorities of the Opposite Party No.2 but in vein. Rather, they misbehaved and threatened her to face consequences. She further strongly pleaded that she is having problem of allergy, itching and gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vs. BMW India Pvt. Ltd. Ors. I (2016) CPJ 692 (NC), Ratna Ghosh and Ors. Vs. P.K. Agarwal I Ors. NCDRC 2010 (2) CPC 534 and Kumari Femy Ors. Vs. Dr. Kavitha V.K. Ors. NCDRC 2013 (1) CPC 253 . The length of Complainant s hair before and after the hair cutting can be seen from the photographs appearing in CCTV footage of the Hotel of the Opposite Party No.2 on 12.04.2018. The Complainant was happy with her hair cut and gave a tip of ₹100 to the hairdresser. The Whatsup talk relied by the Complainant would reveal that there was no grievance in respect of any permanent damage but the entire grievance of the Complainant was that she did not like the hairstyle. Despite the fact that the hair cut was as per instructions of the Complainant, only on hospitality ground and in good faith the Opposite Party No.2 invited the Complainant for straightening her hair and enquired about hair extensions. The Complainant was offered a complimentary keratin hair treatment to straighten her hair with the organic product of Moe Hair Pure by the Moe Hair staff. Moe Hair Pure is an organic protein enriched with hydrolysed wheat protein, sericin and shea butter and is formaldehyde free. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arges for the hair cutting and accordingly invoice was generated. However, while paying the said consideration through a Master Card, the transaction was failed. But still, the Opposite Party No.2 chose to provide her hair cutting service since the Complainant used to come to the Salon since 2004 and the payment might have been paid by her later on. But as the Complainant complained of about the wrong hair cutting and for which the Opposite Party No.2 had tendered apology in WhatsApp, the Opposite Party No.2 did not insist to the Complainant for making the said payment. Even, from the WhatsApp Chat dated 15.04.18, it can be seen that Ms. Christine was suspended for three days. There is no doubt that realizing the mistake done by its staff, the Opposite Party No.2 offered the free hair treatment to the Complainant and Complainant was not attended to for a gesture. Hence, we are of the considered view that the Complainant is a Consumer. 21. Another Preliminary Issue raised by the Opposite Parties is that the claim made by the Complainant in the Complaint is highly exaggerated and inflated and this Commission has no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the Complaint. It is no doubt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by a Consumer on account of deficiency in service, the following observations by a three Judge Bench of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Charan Singh v. Healing Touch Hospital Ors., - (2000) 7 SCC 668 are also apposite: While quantifying damages, Consumer Forums are required to make an attempt to serve the ends of justice so that compensation is awarded, in an established case, which not only serves the purpose of recompensing the individual, but which also at the same time, aims to bring about a qualitative change in the attitude of the service provider. Indeed, calculation of damages depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. No hard and fast rule can be laid down for universal application. While awarding compensation, a Consumer Forum has to take into account all relevant factors and assess compensation on the basis of accepted legal principles, on moderation. It is for the Consumer Forum to grant compensation to the extent it finds it reasonable, fair and proper in the facts and circumstances of a given case according to the established judicial standards where the claimant is able to establish his charge. 24. Keeping in mind the observations of the Hon ble A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
