Adv. For the Complainant: - A.K. Mishra and Others
Adv. For O.P. No. 1 :- No
Adv. For O.P.No.2 :- No
Date of filing of the Case :- 25.09.2020
Date of Order :-08.11.2023
JUDGMENT
Smt. Jyotsna Rani Mishra , Member
Brief facts of the case :-
The complainant Sreyasee Mishra as a new consumer of opposite parties being a subscriber of Rs.849/- plan of the BSNL optical fiber Internet connection (Bharat fiber voice service) and was asked to deposits Rs.5000/- rupees in total (OP1) BSNL office asked her to deposit Rs.1000/- first as advance. BSNL office harassed her to coming office again and again.
And OP1(BSNL Office) charged extra money to her from original amount Rs.849/- and she was shocked to see the given a bill of Rs.849/- and was told that the rest bill of Rs.4151/-will be
-2-
sent to her through the technician. And when she asked for original money receipt (OP1) could not provide, the original money was paid by her. She contends that she has been cheated by the (OP2)and has paid extra amounts which are not the original amount. Subsequently not provided with receipts and telephone connection even after full payment. As a result she has been cheated. harassed and suffered mental agony.
Complainant relies on following Document.
- Receipt of Payment of Bill.
Having gone through the complainant its accompanied documents and hearing the complainant prima facie. It seemed to be genuine case hence admitted and notice to the OPS were served and in response they appear their written version.
To counter the charge in rival contention Ops filed a written version denying the allegations of the complainant. It contends that the complainant was informed of the charges up front and that she agreed to pay the same. It further contends that OP2 is not its agent and that it is not responsible for any actions of (OP2)
I have heard the arguments of the parties and have perused the documents on record .I am of the Opinion that the complainant has proved her case. The Op1 has failed to provide the original money receipt to the complainant . This is a clear deficiency in service. The complainant has also suffered mental agony due to the harassment and cheating by OP2. Accordingly I hold that Ops are guilty of deficiency in service , and unfair trade practice for fraudulently taking extra amount for internet connection from the complainant and not given service. Hence Order.
ORDER
I directed the Opposite parties to pay the following compensation to the complainant. Rs.30,000/- pay a fine towards deficiency in service. Rs.5,000/- for mental agony suffered by complainant. The Opposite party is also directed to provides the original money receipt to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order.
The Opposite party is further directed to pay costs of Rs.1000/- for litigation expenses.
-3-
This order shall be complied with within 30 days from the dt of this order. Failing which the entire amount should be paid by Ops @ 12% interest till realization.
No award as to cost.
PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION TO-DAY 08th day of November‘ 2023.
