Kerala

Trissur

CC/06/1165

Pushpalatha - Complainant(s)

Versus

ACC Computer - Opp.Party(s)

K. Arunkumar Kaimal

28 Nov 2009

ORDER


CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
Ayyanthole , Thrissur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/06/1165

Pushpalatha
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

ACC Computer
Techno Systems
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Padmini Sudheesh 2. Rajani P.S. 3. Sasidharan M.S

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
1. Pushpalatha

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. ACC Computer 2. Techno Systems

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. K. Arunkumar Kaimal

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
2. Hrishikesh.P.



ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

 
By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President:
 
            The complainant intended to start a telephone booth for her livelihood and the respondents approached the complainant and requested to avail Reliance PCO connection. She paid for all the accessories during December 2005. She had also paid Rs.2406/- for the recharge coupon. The petitioner was made to believe that as the amount for the recharge coupon has been paid the phone would work on the date of inauguration of the booth. It was also made to believe that the recharge coupon would be live and calls for its value can be made. When the booth was setting to function it was seen that the phone did not work. The complainant contacted the respondents and stated that the phone was not working. The respondent stated that the complainant should take a new charge coupon for Rs.2406/- even though valid did not seem to work and the respondents stated that they would adjust this amount in future. But the respondents did not act as per their rules. Hence this complaint.
 
            2. The respondents called absent and set exparte.
 
            3. In order to prove the case the complainant filed affidavit.
 
            4. According to the complainant, she is entitled to get the value of recharge coupon since it was not worked. Since there is no evidence to the contrary this complaint is liable to be allowed.
 
            5. In the result, the complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to return Rs.2406/- (Rupees two thousand four hundred and six only) with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of complaint till realization with cost Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only within a month to the complainant.
 

             Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 28th day of November 2009.




......................Padmini Sudheesh
......................Rajani P.S.
......................Sasidharan M.S