TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (9) TMI 1487
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 hairstyling of the Complainant in her place. Though the Complainant was not satisfied with her services in the past but on the assurance of the Manager of the Salon that she had improved her work, the Complainant agreed to have hairstyling from her. According to the Complainant, she specifically instructed the hairdresser, Christine for long flicks/layers covering her face in the front and at the back and 4 inch straight hair trim from the bottom. It is alleged in the Complaint that as the Complainant was wearing high powered spectacles and was requested by the hairdresser to keep her head constantly down, she was not able to see herself clearly in the mirror. She further averred that it was a simple haircut but when the hairdresser took more than an hour to do the hairstyling, she questioned about more time and rep....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....istance 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 on the part of Opposite Parties and seeking written apology from the ITC Management as well as compensation of Rs.3 crores for harassment, humiliation and mental trauma. 6. Upon notice, both the Opposite Parties contested the Complaint. In his Written Version, the Opposite Party No.1 has contended that he is Non-Executive Chairman of the ITC Limited, Opposite Party No.2 and is not involved in the day-to-day operations of the Company and as such Complaint is liable to be dismissed for mis-joinder of the party. Complaint relates to an alleged deficiency in service pertaining to the cutting and treatment of hairs of the Complainant at a Salon of a Hotel (ITC Maurya) of Opposite Party No. 2 and no allegation of deficiency in service in the Complaint has been made against Opposite Party No.1. Moreover, the Opposite P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 treatment given to the Complainant was perfectly in order. Complainant had filed a Police Complaint in Chankyapuri Police Station, New Delhi but the Police did not find any substance in the said Complaint. The Salon does not sell hairs or indulge in corrupt malpractices as alleged by the Complainant. The staff of the Salon had not misbehaved with the Complainant as alleged. The conduct of the Complainant has caused nuisance and harassment to the management of the ITC Limited and put its esteemed reputation and goodwill at stake. The Complainant was attended to just for a gesture being an old customer and she was given the best available treatment. The present Complaint has been filed by the Complainant to seek undue and unwarranted pecuniary gains and merely to malign the reputation and goodwill of the Company. 09. The Complaina....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 Complaint relates to alleged deficiency in service pertaining to cutting and treatment of the hair of the Complainant in a Salon of a Hotel (ITC Maurya) of the Company ITC Ltd., Opposite Party No.2; (iii) Opposite Party No.1 & 2 have separate entity and are not related to each other; (iv) no allegation of deficiency in service or personal involvement of Yogesh Deveshwar, has been made in the Complaint as well as in evidence filed by the Complainant; (v) he was not in-charge or responsible for the conduct of the business or day to day management of the Salon or the Hotel ITC Maurya where the Complainant alleged deficiency in service; (vi) Mr. Yogesh Deveshwar expired on 11.05.2019 and there was neither any cause of action against him nor is there any cause of action or right to sue surviving; (vii) Mr. Sanjiv Puri became the Chairman and Mana....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fice 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 Society shall not fall within the category of service providers in respect of any dealing of the depositors with such society. 2. However, if it is established that the Ex-Secretary or the Ex-President or office bearers of any Cooperative Credit Society has indulged in misfeasance / fraudulent activity with view to defraud depositors under the cloak of the cooperative credit society, such person shall fall within the category of service providers and shall be liable to compensate the consumers for deficiency in service." 16. 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 parti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ess 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 grey hair due to the faults of the Salon staffs who are ill-trained. She had undergone severe mental breakdown and self-esteem as she was always having long hair and because of fault on the part of the Opposite Party No.2, she has been left with little or almost no hair. She stopped seeking herself in the mirror and her social activities. She is a communication professional and required to involve in meeting and interactive sessions. But she lost her self-confidence due to little hairs. She has also suffered loss of income due to mental breakdown after the shoddy haircut and thereafter the torturous hair treatment. She left her job also. She was a Senior Management Professional and used to earn decent income. She submitted that due to her long well cared hair she modelled for prestigious brands like VLCC and Pantene for hair products and she was also planning t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uired 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. The said product is also sulphur free and ammonia free. Mr. Vicky Kumar and Ms. Alem Sanglir who gave hair treatment to the Complainant, were trained by Moehair to carry out the Moehair Pure Keratin Treatment. The Moehair product was applied on the Complainant's hair strand, leaving one inch from the room of the hair and not on the scalp as alleged. Complainant has failed to substantiate the alleged financial loss caused to her due to the alleged chopping off her entire hair and alleged damage cause to her due to the treatment. There is no whisper in the Whatsapp messages, Rejoinder and Affidavit by way of evidence filed by the Complainant, about the alleged permanent damaged caused to her hairs. No where it is mentioned that how much money she spent for the rectification of the alleged damage to her hair. Section 65- (B) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 mandates that where it ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ered 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 that under the Act 1986, pecuniary jurisdiction was to be determined by taking the value of the goods or services and compensation, if any, claimed. Meaning thereby that the value of goods or services as also the compensation is to be added to arrive at a conclusion as to whether the National Commission has the jurisdiction or not. A three Member Bench of this Commission in the case of Ambrish Kumar Shukla & Ors. Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. - I (2017) CPJ1 (NC) while dealing with the question of Pecuniary Jurisdiction of the Consumer Fora, has held that for the purpose of determining the pecuniary jurisdiction of a Consumer Forum under Act 1986, the consideration paid or agreed to be paid by the consumer at the time of purchasing the goods or hiring or availing of the services, as the case may be, plus the amount of the compensation, is to be considered. The present Complaint has bee....