PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

Consumer Complaint No.- 15/2023

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member

Shyam Kumar Guru,

S/O-Basudeb Guru,

R/O-Gujrati Colony,Sambalpur town, PO-Sambalpur,

Ps-Town,Tahasil-Sambalpur,

Dist-Sambalpur-768001, Odisha.                        .……….......Complainant.

Vrs.

1. Branch Head/Manager, Reliance JIO,

Fourth Floor, Citylife Building, Budharaja,

PO-Budharaja, PS-Ainthapali, Dist-Sambalpur-768004.

2. Senior Head/ Senior Manager, Reliance JIO,

Reliance Corporate Park, NO. 8 A Wing, First Floor, 5 TTC Industrial Area,

Thanae Belapur Road, Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai-400701.

3. Sakuntala Pujari, Aged About 63 years,

W/O- Swetaban Pujari. At C/O-P C Sahu, Sriram Bihar,

Govindtola, PO/PS-Dhanupali, Tahasil/Dist-Sambalpur-768005.

4. Nibedita Sarangi, Aged About 43 years,

W/O- Rudraprasad Sarangi. At C/O-P C Sahu, Sriram Bihar,

Govindtola, PO/PS-Dhanupali,

Tahasil/Dist-Sambalpur-768005.               ...……….Opp. Parties

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant         :- Self
2. For the O.P. No.1 & 2        :- Sri. P.K.Mahapatra, Adv. & Associates
3. For the O.P. No.3            & 4        :- Smt. P.Mohapatra, Adv. & Associates

Date of Filing:06.02.2023,  Date of Hearing :22.08.2023  Date of Judgement : 28.08.2023

Presented by Sri Sadananda Tripathy, Member.

1. The Brief fact of the Complainant is that the Complainant is a bonafide subscriber of two mobile SIM connection of the OP No.1 & 2 bearing SIM Nos. 8249419129 & 7847896518 since 2016 & 2020 and the number were issued/allotted in favour of the Complainant, after due documentation as per the prescribed guidelines of the OP No. 1 & 2 on behalf of OP No. 2. The Complainant being a businessman have circulated the said number amongst his clients and so also tagged with important accounts in his business to carry out day to day affairs. The Complainant on 20.12.2022 came across the fact that the said mobile number stopped working as no massages were received thereafter from the clients and as a result of which he rushed to the office of OP No. 1 to lodge customer complaint regarding the stopped service of the said number, but the Complainant was shocked to know from the dealing assistant of the OP No. 1 that the said number is no more in the name of the Complainant. Thereafter the Complainant ran pillar to post in the Office of the OP No. 1 to ascertain under what & which authority the OP No. 1 have transferred the ownership of the said number without the knowledge & consent/permission and also to collect the information to whom the said number was transferred & under what documentation but in vain. However the Complainant after several attempts came to know that the said number is transferred in the name of OP No. 3 & 4 and for proper appreciation and adjudication of the dispute they are impleded as necessary party to this case. Due to the callousness and uncalled for action/conduct of the OP No. 1 & 2, the Complainant not only sustained heavy financial loss due to loss of clients but also suffered huge mental stress & agony and for which the OPs are bound to compensate.
2. The Written Objection of the OP No. 1 & 2 is that the Complainant had ported into the service network of Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited from Bharati Airtel Limited on different dates. As per process and in adherence with the prescibed guidelines the Complainant was inducted into the network of the 1 & 2 on 02.01.2017 and on 07.09.2020. The Complainant had last recharged both the said numbers on 29.03.2022 and due to lack of recharge for a substantial period of time the same were disconnected from the system of these OPs and as such since the Complainant was ported in from Bharati Airtel Limited the said numbers were retrieved to its original service provider as per process. As such once these numbers are retrieved to its original service provider these OPs are incapacitated to bring back the same again as per process.  As per process the Customer is repeatedly given reminders to recharge on time to avail seamless/complete services to which the Complainant has ignored for the reason best known to the Complainant only and with an ulterior motive has filed this case to litigate, harass and grab away compensation by manipulating this honourable forum. Hence the instant complaint is totally misconceived and vague. The Complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service and/or unfair trade practice against these OPs. As such the present complaint should be dismissed limeline.

The Written Version of the OP NO. 3 & 4 is that the Complainant is son-in-law of OP No. 3 and brother-in-law of OP No. 4 and both of the OPs had given money and their documents of identity to brings SIMs for them and the Complainant had provided the SIMs bearing No. 8249419129 to OP No. 3 and SIM No. 7847896518 to OP No. 4 for their personal use. The Complainant had givens SIM which was in his name, to his wife, who is daughter of OP NO. 3 and younger sister of OP No. 4 and his wife was using the same for official purpose of her Samsung Mobile Service Center and also linked to her account and after matrimonial dispute arose between Complainant and his wife in the year 2021 , the Complainant started disturbing/harassing his wife in her business by using the SIM given to her by playing mischief as the SIM was in his name and when it came to the knowledge of the OP No. 3 & 4 they rushed to OP No. 1 and got their SIMs verified and found that both the SIMs are in the name of the Complainant so both of them submitted their document of identity and got those SIMs ported to Airtel and registered the SIMs in their favour. This is the genuine procedure both the OPs followed. The OP NO. 3 is using the SIM for her personal use and OP NO. 4 has been using the SIM for education of her son. The Complainant has made the OP No. 3 & 4 parties in this case only to harass them and to defame them and to cause harm them financially and mentally and he succeeded in his attempt. After distributing SIMs to OP No. 3 & 4 the Complainant has no right to use those SIMs for his business or any other purpose. Whatever steps the OP No. 1 & 2 have taken in porting the SIMs to Airtel Company and getting it registered in favour of OP No. 3 & 4 were proper and legal. With an ill intention Complainant had provided SIMs to OP No. 3 & 4 which were in his own name in spite of taking money and documents from OP No. 3 & 4. Under the circumstances the complaint filed by the Complainant deserves to be dismissed with exemplary cost.

3. From the above it is found that the Complainant is son-in-law of OP No. 3 and brother-in-law of OP No. 4 and both of the OPs had given money and their documents of identity to bring SIMs for them and the Complainant had provided the SIMs bearing No. 8249419129 to OP No. 3 and SIM No. 7847896518 to OP No. 4 for their personal use. After matrimonial dispute arose between the daughter of OP No. 3 and the Complainant in 2021, the OP No. 3 & 4 had ported the both numbers to another company by giving required documents as per process. Further it is observed that the Complainant had last recharged both the said numbers on 29.03.2022 and due to lack of recharge for a substantial period of time the same were disconnected from the system of the OP No. 1 & 2 and as such since the Complainant was ported in from Bharati Airtel Limited the said numbers were retrieved to its original service provider as per process.  So there is no deficiency on the part of the OPs. Hence the case is dismissed on contest against the O.Ps.

            Order pronounced in the open Court today on 28^th day of August, 2023.

Free copies of this order to the parties are supplied.