A Punjab-based family that was forced to spend a night in their car in sub-zero temperatures after finding that their pre-booked Gulmarg hotel did not exist has been awarded nearly Rs 48,000 by a consumer commission, according to The Indian Express news report.
The Punjab District Consumer Commission directed a well-known online travel booking portal to refund Rs 18,775 to the man, pay Rs 25,000 as compensation for physical harassment and mental agony and Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs.
The order, passed on September 17, 2026 by a bench comprising president Lalit Mohan Dogra and member BS Matharu, held that the portal was negligent, deficient in service and engaged in unfair trade practices by listing ‘ghost’ or non-existent properties.
Family spent night in car in heavy snowfall
The complainant, a practicing advocate from Punjab’s Gurdaspur, had booked accommodation through the travel portal for a family trip to Srinagar and Gulmarg in December 2025. He paid Rs 5,788 for a room in Srinagar and Rs 12,987 for a room in Gulmarg.
He reached Srinagar on December 27, 2025, with his wife and two adult children. On arrival at the listed location, he found that the booked hotel did not exist and the address corresponded to a private homestay that could not honour the booking. The family had to arrange alternative lodging at additional expense.
The next day, due to traffic and army convoy delays, they reached Gulmarg around 8 pm on December 28, only to discover that the second booked hotel also did not exist. With heavy snowfall, no rooms available and temperatures at around -4°C, the family spent the night inside their vehicle.
The ordeal also rendered their pre-booked Gondola tickets useless, and they had to return to Gurdaspur on December 29 without being able to enjoy Gulmarg.
Portal claimed it was only an intermediary
In its defence, the travel booking portal argued that it acted only as an intermediary for confirmed bookings on behalf of customers with service providers such as hotels and other hospitality providers. It said that upon receiving a request from customers, it forwarded the booking to the concerned service provider through software systems embedded on its website and mobile application.
It also claimed that the complainant had not impleaded the hotels as parties and that the complaint should be dismissed on that ground.
The portal further stated that when it contacted the respective hotels after the complaint, they informed it that the complainant had never approached them and was accordingly marked as a “no show”.
Commission rejects ‘no-show’ plea
The consumer commission rejected the portal’s “no-show” defence, calling it contradictory and perverse.
“We are of the view that, due to the non-existence of the Gulmarg property, combined with severe snowfall and sub-zero conditions (-4°C), the complainant and his family, including his wife and two adult children, were forced to sleep overnight inside their vehicle,” the order said.
It observed that a consumer cannot “check in” to a hotel that does not physically exist, and therefore the “no-show” ground was an afterthought taken only to escape liability.
The commission noted that the complainant had established on record that he had paid for a “Family Room at Hotel Heritage Rose Inn” in Srinagar and a booking at “Hotel Apple Tree Resorts” in Gulmarg, but both properties were found to be non-existent on the ground.
Portal held liable despite ‘intermediary’ claim
The commission held that the travel portal could not avoid consumer liability by claiming to be merely an online intermediary. Since it collected full payment, issued confirmed booking vouchers and promised verified accommodation, it had responsibilities to consumers under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and the E-Commerce Rules, 2020.
It observed that listing non-existent hotels as verified accommodations amounted to an unfair trade practice, while failure to provide the confirmed accommodation constituted deficiency in service.
The order stated:
- The complainant proved that he had paid for confirmed bookings through the portal.
- Both the Srinagar and Gulmarg properties were not available as booked.
- Booking confirmations, emails and other documents showed that the accommodation was not made available at the destination.
- The company failed to provide adequate assistance or re-accommodation despite repeated communications through WhatsApp, customer care and email.
Compensation and relief awarded
Taking into account the hardship faced by the family, the commission awarded:
- A refund of Rs 18,775 for the unprovided accommodation.
- Rs 25,000 as compensation for extreme physical harassment and mental agony.
- Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs.
The order underscored that online travel portals can be held responsible for confirmed bookings when listed properties do not exist. It reinforced their duty to verify accommodation listings, assist stranded consumers and ensure that intermediary status does not become a shield against consumer liability.
What consumers can do in such situation
Consumers facing similar grievances can contact the consumer helpline in their respective states. In Punjab, the helpline number is 1800-425-1082. They can also dial the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.
The case reminds travellers to check hotel details themselves, keep booking confirmations and messages, and approach consumer forums if they face poor service or unfair practices by online travel platforms.