- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Hotel Booking Nightmare: Chandigarh Commission Orders MakeMyTrip, Hotel & OYO to Pay for Last-Minute Cancellation
Hotel Booking Nightmare: Chandigarh Commission Orders MakeMyTrip, Hotel & OYO to Pay for Last-Minute Cancellation
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh, has ruled in favour of a consumer who filed a complaint against MakeMyTrip (Opposite Party No. 1) and Goibibo (Opposite Party No. 2).
The complainant, who had booked a hotel room for a family vacation through Goibibo, was informed just before their trip that the hotel was unavailable and their booking had been cancelled. Despite receiving a refund, the complainant checked online and discovered that the same rooms were still available at a much higher tariff.
The commission determined that the cancellation was arbitrary and caused significant mental harassment to the complainant. As a result, MakeMyTrip was found responsible for causing the complainant mental distress and was ordered to pay compensation of ₹35,000 and litigation costs of ₹7000.
Vineet Marwaha, the complainant, made a reservation for a family vacation through Goibibo's website (Opposite Party No. 2) to stay at The Essence Retreat (Opposite Parties No. 3&4) from December 26 to 30, 2021, for which he paid ₹10,432. However, on December 23, 2021, Goibibo informed Vineet of the cancellation, attributing it to the hotel's non-operational status and refunded the amount. Dissatisfied with this development, Vineet conducted an online check and found the same rooms at The Essence Retreat available for the specified dates but at a significantly higher tariff of ₹27,207. Despite bringing this inconsistency to their attention, Vineet did not receive a satisfactory response. Alleging deficient service and unfair trade practices, Vineet subsequently filed a consumer complaint against MakeMyTrip, Goibibo, and the hotel.
MakeMyTrip asserted its role as a mediator among the complainant, the hotel, and the hospitality service provider, Oyo. They clarified that their function is limited to transmitting the payment from the complainant to the hotel and service provider, primarily facilitating the completion of the confirmed hotel booking. MakeMyTrip contended that they bore no responsibility for the cancellation or the subsequent rate hike, underscoring the absence of any deficiency in their service or involvement in unfair trade practices.
The Commission noted that the complainant, having booked the hotel in advance, faced an unexpected cancellation just before their trip. Despite being informed that the hotel was non-operational, evidence revealed the same rooms were available online for significantly higher prices, suggesting a potential motive for the cancellation driven by profit.
Furthermore, the Commission found that MakeMyTrip and the other Opposite Parties' cancellation of the booking without justification caused significant distress and inconvenience to the complainant and their family. Consequently, the Commission upheld the complaint and directed MakeMyTrip, The Hotel, and Oyo Rooms to collectively compensate the complainant with ₹35,000, along with an additional ₹7,000 for litigation costs. The order stipulated compliance within 30 days.