TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 178X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsation - In this respect, this Court repeatedly requested the respondent, who was appearing in person, to refer to the material which she had placed before the NCDRC with respect to her present job at the time when she undertook the hair styling on 12.04.2018. This Court also required her to produce the material regarding her advertising and modelling assignments in the past or for which she had entered into a contract or agreement for the present and future with any of the brands to show her expected loss. The respondent utterly failed to demonstrate from the record filed before the NCDRC or before this Court regarding the above queries. In the absence of any material with regard to her existing job, the emoluments received by her, any past, present or future assignments in modeling which the respondent was likely to get or even the interview letter for which the respondent alleges she had gone to the saloon to make herself presentable, it would be difficult to quantify or assess the compensation under these heads. What could be quantified was compensation under the head of pain, suffering and trauma. However, amount of Rs. 2 Crores would be extremely excessive and disproporti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stine on previous occasions, accepted her services on the assurance of the Manager of the saloon that Ms Christine has shown great improvement in her performance over a period of time. 2.2 The respondent gave specific instructions to the said hair dresser in the following terms: long flicks/layers covering her face in the front and at the back and 4-inch straight hair trim from the bottom . The respondent was instructed to keep her head down and as she wears high powered spectacles (removed at the time of hairstyling), she could not clearly see herself in the mirror as to what the hair dresser was actually doing. According to the respondent, the instructions given were simple and would not take much time but when the hair dresser took more than an hour to do the hair styling, she questioned the hair dresser as to why she was taking so much time. She received an answer from the hair dresser that she was giving her the London Haircut . 2.3 When the hair styling was complete, to her utter surprise, she noticed that the hair dresser Ms Christine had chopped off her entire hair leaving only 4 inches from the top and barely touching to her shoulders which was quite contrary to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve her temporary relief. Thereafter, her hair had become hard and rough and the respondent could not even run her fingers through it. The discontentment and the annoyance expressed by the respondent was not taken well. The staff was abusive, rude and disrespectful. She was also threatened to face consequences on visit to ITC, Maurya. However, the complaints made by the respondent to the Manager of ITC Group of Hotels were an exercise in futility. 3. Left with no option, the respondent filed a complaint before the NCDRC alleging deficiency in service, seeking written apology from the management as also compensation of Rs.3 crores for harassment, humiliation, mental trauma, loss of career, loss of income and loss of future prospects. 4. The NCDRC issued notices whereupon the Opposite Party No.1 before the NCDRC, namely Mr Yogesh Deveshwar took a defence that he was a non-executive Chairman of the ITC Limited and was not involved in the day-to-day operations of the company, as such he has been wrongly impleaded and the complaint deserves to be dismissed for misjoinder of parties. He also took several other objections on merits. 5. The appellant, arrayed as Opposite Party No.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dent underwent severe mental breakdown and trauma due to the negligence in the services provided to her and as a result of which she also lost her job. She also suffered burning sensation and irritation in her scalp. For the above reasons, the NCDRC awarded a lumpsum compensation of Rs.2 crores to be sufficient to meet the ends of justice and, accordingly, allowed the complaint. 9. We have heard Mr K. V. Viswanathan and Mr Debal Kumar Banerji, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Ms Aashna Roy, the respondent-in-person and perused the material on record. 10. The question as to whether there was a deficiency in service or not would be a question of fact. The NCDRC, based upon the evidence led which included the affidavits, photographs, CCTV footage, whatsapp chats and other material on record, came to the conclusion that there was deficiency in service. We are not inclined to interfere with the said finding regarding deficiency in service as the same is based upon appreciation of evidence and thus would be a pure question of fact. 11. The next question is that, on account of such deficiency in service, what would be an adequate compensation taking into consideration ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are of the view that the respondent if she has material to substantiate her claim may be given an opportunity to produce the same. Once deficiency in service is proved then the respondent is entitled to be suitably compensated under different heads admissible under law. Question is on what basis and how much. Let this quantification be left to the wisdom of the NCDRC based upon material if any that may be placed before it by the respondent. 16. In view of the above, we are left with no option but to set aside the order of NCDRC awarding Rs.2 crores as compensation for loss of income, mental breakdown and trauma and pain and suffering. We remit the matter to the NCDRC to give an opportunity to the respondent to lead evidence with respect to her claim of Rs.3 crores. In case such evidence is led then adequate right of rebuttal be given to the appellant. The NCDRC may thereafter take a fresh decision in accordance with the material that may be placed on record on the issue of quantification of compensation. The appeal is allowed with the aforesaid directions. 17. There shall be no order as to costs. 18. Pending application(s), if any, are disposed of. 19. This Court while ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
