PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 52/2023

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member

PRABHAT RAMJAN

S/O- Basanta Kumar Ramjan

R/O- Mahulpali, Tahasil- Bamra

Dist- Sambalpur, Pin-768228.                              ………………Complainant

-Vrs-

1. C.E.O RELIANCE JIO INFOCOMM LIMITED

9^th Floor, Maker Chambers IV,222

Nariman Point, Mumbai MH, Pin-400021 IN

2. RELIANCE JIO INFOCOMM LIMITED

1^st Floor, Wing A/B, Fortune Tower

 Gangadhar Meher Marg, Chandrasekharpur

Bhubhaneswar, Pin-751023

3. RELIANCE JIO STORE , KESEIBAHAL

At- Kuchinda, Near Byepass Road

Po/Ps-Kuchinda, Dist-Sambalpur, Odisha, Pin-768222

4. BRANCH MANAGER  STATE BANK OF INDIA

KESEIBAHAL BRANCH

AT- Keseibahal, Via- Kuchinda, Ps- Keseibahal

Dist- Sambalpur, Odisha, Pin-768228                           ……Opposite Parties

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant         :-       Sri. R.Gupta, Adv. & Associates
2. For the O.P.1 to 3             :-      Sri. P.K.Mahapatra, Adv. & Associates
3. For the O.P. No.4                           :-       Ex-parte

Date of Filing:06.04.2023,  Date of Hearing :25.09.2023  Date of Judgement : 17.10.2023

Presented by Sri Sadananda Tripathy, Member.

1. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant is using Jio Mobile Number 9583740659 since last 6 to 7 years and having an account with SBI at Kesaibahal Branch. On dtd. 12.01.2023, the Complainant got a call from Jio Infocomm that his validity is going to expire today and advised recharge to immediately to avoid stop page of your service. Thereafter, the Complainant recharged his mobile phone with an amount of Rs. 2545/- for a validity of 336 days from the date of recharge through SBI YONO App of SBI and payment was deducted from his account of SBI. The transaction has been shown in the SBI YONO App and the account statement has been downloaded from YONO SBI. The Complainant after recharge waited for some times but found that his number has not been recharged, he again waited for 2-3 hours in a thought that might be it occurs due to bad connectivity or Bank Server Maintenance but the recharge has not been shown in his Jio account till waiting of 24 hours and behind receiving a recharge successful message. Then called the Jio customer care and on inquiry one of a lady said that his number has not been recharged and ask him to recharge immediately. After that the Complainant rushed to the SBI for inquiry, where the B.M himself informed the Complainant that the amount has been paid and there is no deficiency from the side of the bank after looking upon the transaction history. The Branch Manager also provided him a copy of Statement of account about the Transaction in which it has been mentioned that payment has been deducted and the recharge request has been made against the recharge. Finding no solution after running to all the parties the Complainant became hopeless and tired, wrote a mail to the Company for solution in this matter. The Complainant then attached the copies of transaction alert and Account Statement sent an email to the customer care for redressal but they did not take any interest in the matter and the case is unsolved. After several request, telephonic conversation, mails, physical visit and running to the offices of the Complainant got no results. Hence this case.
2. The Written Version of the OP No. 1 & 2 is that since no amount was credited to the account of the OP NO. 1 & 2 for recharge of the mobile number of the Complainant, the Customer Care executive of the OP NO. 1 & 2 informed that no recharged request has been received by them and advised the Complainant to contact the OP No. 4, SBI from where the amount of the alleged recharge was deducted from the account of the Complainant. As alleged by the Complainant the recharge amount so deducted from the bank account of the Complainant maintained with the OP No. 4 might have been credited to any TPA and the said amount has neither been received by the OP NO. 1 & 2 nor any recharge request has been forwarded to the OP NO. 1 & 2 for recharge of the mobile number of the Complainant from the said Third Party App. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the present complaint, it should be dismissed in limine with heavy costs.
3. After going through the records, evidences and submission of parties, it is observed that the Complainant has recharged his mobile phone with an amount of Rs. 2545/- for a validity of 336 days from the date of recharge through SBI YONO App of SBI and payment has been deducted from his account of SBI and after such recharge, a message was shown in the mobile of the Complainant that recharge successful. The Bank has also confirmed that the amount has been credited successfully. An amount of Rs. 2545/- has been transferred to the O.Ps whereas recharge was shown successful. It proves that the O.ps have received the amount whereas recharge not made. It amounts to deficiency in service on the part of O.P. No.1 & 2.

                             ORDER

The case allowed on contest against O.P. No.1 & 2. The O.P No. 1 & 2 are directed to refund the recharged amount of Rs. 2545/- with 9% interest, Rs. 25,000/- towards negligence, deficiency in service as Compensation and Rs. 10,000/- towards cost & litigation expenses of the petition to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of order, failing which the amount will further carry 9% interest per annum till realization.

Order pronounced in the open Court today on 17^th day of Oct, 2023.

Free copies of this order to the parties are supplied.