In a significant legal battle, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) issued a landmark judgment in the Holiday Voucher Scheme dispute case. The case involved a dispute between a consumer and a holiday voucher company over the terms of a referral scheme. Let’s delve into the details of this intriguing legal saga.
Facts
- An employee of the appellant communicated the holiday scheme to the respondent in September 2012.
- The scheme offered free gifts based on the number of referrals made by the subscriber.
- The respondent purchased three vouchers at Rs 5998 each, totaling Rs 17,994.
- The terms of the scheme were available on the appellant’s website.
- The appellant addressed the referral scheme in an email to the respondent.
- The District Forum allowed the respondent’s claim.
- The State Consumer Forum and NCDRC confirmed the District Forum’s decision.
- The scheme required referrals of ‘friends and associates’ to avail of the gifts.
- Monetary compensation of Rs 5,000 for mental torture and costs of Rs 2,000 were awarded.
Also Read: Court’s Jurisdiction in Re-appraising Arbitrator’s Findings
Arguments
- The appellant’s scheme offered free gifts contingent on subscriber referrals.
- The respondent did not make any referrals as required by the scheme.
- Appellant objected to the jurisdiction of the District Forum.
- The appellant referenced an email dated 18 September 2012, one day after alleged communication with the respondent.
- Termination of employee services supported respondent’s claim of free gifts assurance.
- Discrepancy raised by respondent’s counsel regarding the email not being part of the District Forum records.
- Concern raised about District Forum’s order granting gifts exceeding the amount paid by the subscriber.
- The subscriber was not entitled to the ‘free gifts’ as a right upon purchasing holiday vouchers.
- The free gifts were dependent on making referrals, which the respondent did not do.
- The respondent did not meet the conditions required to receive the ‘free gifts’.
Also Read: Contrary Directions in Issuance of Letter of Intent
Analysis
- The directions of the District Forum were considered
- The SCDRC and NCDRC affirmed the directions of the District Forum
- The outcome of following these directions will result in a manifestly absurd outcome
Also Read: Application for Stay in Civil Suit Rejected: Court’s Legal Analysis
Decision
- The appeal was allowed and the NCDRC’s judgment was set aside.
- No costs were ordered.
- The complaint filed by the respondent was dismissed.
- Both the SCDRC and the NCDRC were found to have erred in confirming the District Forum’s order.
- The District Forum’s order was against the terms of the agreement between the parties.
Case Title: TODAY MERCHANDISE PVT. LTD. Vs. ANIL KUMAR LUTHRA (2020 INSC 20)
Case Number: C.A. No.-000080-000080 / 2020
