BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL
Present: Sri. K.V.H.Prasad B.A.LL.B., President
And
Smt. C.Preethi, M.A.LL.B., Lady Member
Monday the 15th day of October,2007
C.C.No. 61/07
M. Nagaraju, S/o. M. Krishnaiah, Trade Union Leader,
Resident of C/187, Srisailam Project, Kurnool. … Complainant
Versus
- Mr. Kotha Venkateswara Rao, R.K. Distributors and AIRTEL Authorized Distributor,
Main Bazar, Sunnipenta, Kurnool District.
- The Chief Marketing Manager, Bharti Tele-Ventures Limited,
Splendid Towers,
Opp. Begumpet Police Station,HUDA Road,Begumpet, Hyderabad.
- The Managing Director, Bharati Tele-Ventures Limited,
Qutab Ambience, H-5/12, Merauli Road, New Delhi - 110 030. … Opposite Parties
This complaint coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri. M. Sivaji Rao,Advocate, Kurnool, for complainant, and Sri.M.L.Sreenivasa Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool opposite party No.1 and Sri. A.Anil Kumar, Advocate for Opposite party 2 and 3 and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-
ORDER
(As per Smt. C.Preethi, Member)
C.C.No.61-2007
1. This consumer complaint of the complainant is filed U/S 12 of C.P.Act,1986 seeking a direction on opposite parties to pay Rs.2 lakhs as compensation for hardship, to return Rs.1,195/- collected by opposite party No.1 towards AIRTEL connection, to return Rs.442/- collected by opposite parties 2 and 3 by way of Demand Draft, to send air ticket to and fro to New Delhi and any other relief or reliefs which the complainant is entitled in the circumstances of the case.
2. The brief facts of the complainants case is that the complainant in the year 2005 attracted by the offer of AIRTEL free flight facility announced by opposite parties 1 and 3 to woo the new customers and the complainant became a subscriber of opposite parties 1 and 3 on 31.10.2005 with a hope of getting free air ticket to New Delhi. The opposite party 1 collected Rs.1,195/- towards connection charges and activation and Mobile No.9849357568 was sanction to the complainant. There after, the opposite party No.2 sent a requisition form of AIRTEL free flight offer application along with terms and conditions to the complainant and the last date submission of application form was 20.11.2005 and the last date of travel was 30.4.2006. As per terms and conditions of the offer the subscriber can choose any one destinations among Hyderabad, Mumbai, Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, Goa, Kolkatta, Tirupathi, Vijayawada, or Vishakapatnam and has to submit the same to any AIRTEL relationship center along with demand draft of Rs.442/-.As such the complainant has submitted his application to opposite party No.1 along with demand draft for Rs.442/- and fixed 17.1.2006 as date of journey to Delhi and 23.1.2006 return date of journey in his application. But as promised the opposite party No.1 and 3 did not send the air tickets to the complainant and there after made many telephone calls to opposite parties 2 and 3 to send free air tickets but there was no response. Hence, got issued legal notice dated 24.4.2007 to all opposite parties but the opposite parties neither reply nor sent any amount. The opposite parties made the above attractive offer to lure the customers but did not fulfill their promise which amounts to un fair practice and deficiency of service. Hence, the complainant resorted to the forum for reliefs.
3. In support of their case the complainant relied on the following documents viz., (1) sim card cover , (2) Xerox copy of AIRTEL free flight offer booking request form , (3) printed broacher of free flight offer with terms and conditions , (4) schedule of flight sectors under AIRTEL free flight offer and (5) office copy of legal notice dated 24.4.2007 along with three postal receipts and acknowledgements of opposite party No.3 besides to the sworn affidavit of the complainant and two third party affidavits and the above documents are marked as Ex.A1 to A5 for its appreciation in this case. The complainant caused interrogatories to the opposite parties 1,2, and 3 and the complainant two third parties replied to the interrogatories of opposite parties.
4. In pursuance to the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant, the opposite parties 1 and 3 appeared through their standing counsel and contested the case by filling written version.
5. The written version of opposite party No.1 submits that the complaint of the complainant is not maintainable either in law or on facts but submits that he is a whole sale distributor for AIRTEL sim cards/ recharge cards and E/LOAD only but not a retail dealer. The facilities the consumers get are done by retailers only and not from distributors. This opposite party simply forwarded the application which it received from retail dealers whom the subscriber has submitted their applications for getting AIRTEL connections. The complainant’s mobile No. 9849357568 was activated by this opposite party after forwarding the application of the complainant to opposite party No.2. The amount of Rs.1,195/- collected by the retail dealer and demand draft of Rs.442/- towards AIRTEL flight tickets taxes has nothing to do with this opposite party. The above offer was made by opposite parties 2 and 3 and this opposite party is not a party at all. As there is no direct transaction or contract between the complainant and this opposite party there is no jurisdiction for the complainant to file complaint against this opposite party and lastly seeks for the dismissal of complaint.
6. The written version of opposite parties 2 and 3 submits that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or in facts and submits that during 2005 the opposite parties announced free flight offer subject to terms and conditions mentioned in the offer broacher and the complainant having accepted the terms and conditions have adopted to the avail the said offer and a Mobile No.9849357568 was given to him. The complainant should fill the booking form by giving three choice of departchure and destinations airport and three choices of date and send the said form to opposite party along with requisite demand draft for Rs.442/- towards airport taxes under due acknowledgement . But the complainant has not mentioned the three choice destinations nor the choice dates. Further it is submitted that the last date for submission of form was 20.11.2005 where as the complainant submitted his form on 30.11.2005. The complainant was contacted and was informed about the lapses and in spite of request and reminder the complainant approached the forum for reliefs. The opposite parties after receipt of complainants legal notice replied on 7.5.2007 requesting the complainants Advocate to provide mobile number of the complainant for sending reply to the notice of the complainant, but he did not comply the above request. Thereafter, an amount of Rs.894/- after adjusting the amount against the mobile services utilized by the complainant was returned by way of cheque No. 119735 dated 13.5.2006 along with demand draft for Rs.442/- was duly dispatched to him but the complainant did not choose to en cash the same and concealed the said fact in the legal notice and in the complaint filed before the Forum. Hence, there is no deficiency of service on part of opposite parties and seeks for the dismissal of complaint with costs.
7. In support of their case the opposite parties relied on the following documents viz., (1) authorization dated 1.7.2007 in favour of C.Seshu and (2) office copy of reply notice dated 2.5.2007 besides to the sworn affidavit of the opposite parties 1 and 2 and the above documents are marked ad Ex.B1 and B2 for its appreciation in this case. The opposite parties 1 and 2 replied to the interrogatories of the complainant and caused interrogatories to the complainant and third parties.
8. Hence the point for consideration is to what relief the complainant is entitled alleging deficiency of service on part of opposite parties ?.
9. It is the case of the complainant that he became a subscriber of opposite party No.1 and 3 on 31.10.2005 attracted by the offer of free AIRTEL flight facility vide Ex.A3 and submitted flight offer booking request form vide Ex.A2 to opposite party No.1 on 30.11.2005, but no flight tickets are dispatched to him, hence got issued legal notice dated 24.4.2007 and the opposite party No.2 replied vide Ex.B2 dated 7.5.2007. But on the other side the opposite party No.1 submitted that he is a distributor and nothing to do with offer made by the opposite parties 2 and 3. The opposite parties 2 and 3 submitted that the complainant submitted Ex.A2 AIRTEL free ticket offer booking request form, on 30.11.2005 and the last date of submission of said form was 20.11.2005 as per Ex.A2, but as the complainant submitted his request form (Ex.A2) on 30.11.2005 i.e., after the last date of submission of form, hence his application was rejected and flight tickets are not dispatched to him, but returned to the complainant the amount of Rs.894/- after adjusting the amounts against the mobile services utilized by the complainant by way of cheque No. 119735 dated 13.5.2006 along with demand draft of Rs.442/- . The opposite parties 2 and 3 submits that it despatched the said cheque and demand draft to the complainant, but the complainant denies the receipt of any cheque and demand draft. The opposite party No.1 in answer to the interrogatory No.14 stated that the opposite parties 2 and 3 gave a cheque in his favour and to pay the same to the complainant after its encashment as the complainant refused to received the said amount, he did not encashed it. Hence, it is clear from the above that the cheque and demand draft was not dispatched to the complainant.
10. As the complainant submitted Ex.A2 request form for free flight ticket after the last date of submission of form, the complainant is not remaining entitled for free flight ticket. As the opposite parties failed to return the amount of Rs.894/- and demand draft for Rs.442/- to the complainant, the complainant is remaining entitled to the said amount with interest. As the opposite parties driven the complainant to the forum for redressal the complainant is entitled to costs of Rs.500/- . As no cause of action is made out against opposite party No.1 case against opposite party No.1 is dismissed.
11. In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the opposite parties 2 and 3 jointly and severally to pay to the complainant Rs.894/- and Rs.442/- with 9 % interest per annum from 13.5.2006 till realization along with costs of Rs.500/- within a month of receipt of this order. In default, the opposite parties 2 and 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay to the complainant the above award with 12 % interest per annum from the date of default till realization.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench this the 15th October, 2007.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant :Nil For the opposite parties :Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 . Sim Card Cover.
Ex.A2. Xerox copy Airtel Free Flight offer
Booking request form.
Ex.A3. Printed broacher of free flight offer, terms and
Conditions.
Ex.A4. Schedule of flight sectors under Airtel free flight
Offer and the cover addressed to the complainant.
Ex.A5. Office copy of legal notice, dated 24.4.2007
along with (3) three postal receipts and acknowledgments
Of opposite party No.3
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:
Ex.B1 . Authorization, dated 01.7.2007 in favour of
C. Sheshu.
Ex.B2. Office copy of reply notice, dated 7.5.2007.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Copy to:-
1. Sri.M. Sivaji Rao, Advocate, Kurnool.
2. Sri.M.L.Sreenivasa Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool.
3. A. Anil Kumar, Advocate, Kurnool.
Copy was made ready on:
Copy was dispatched on:
Copy was delivered to parties:
