BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 29th day of May, 2009

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER

SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER

C.C No.225/2008

Between

Complainant : Kochurani Sebastian,

Kalappurackal House,

Ponnamkani,

Kombayar P.O.

(By Adv: V.M. Joymon)

And

Opposite Parties : 1. The Accounts Officer,

B.S.N.L, Jyothi Super Bazar,

Thodupuzha P.O,

Thodupuzha.

2. The Sub Divisional Officer,

B.S.N.L Sub Divisional Office,

Nedumkandam,

Nedumkandam P.O,

Idukki District.

(Both by Adv: Sibi Thomas)

O R D E R

SMT.SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER)
 

The complainant is the subscriber of a WLL phone No. NGNWL- 200322. The bill dated 07/09/08 was issued to her demanding Rs.1,598/-. Since the bill appeared to be excessive, she complained to the opposite party regarding the billing. The complainant is a CDS member and working in Kudumbasree unit. She had a mobile phone also. When the detailed bill was obtained, it was found that 141 calls were made to a mobile No.9744182610. The complainant and her family have never called the said number. The holder of the mobile No.9744182610 was found is an Auto driver, who carry her children morning to the school and evening to home. The opposite parties have not investigated the complaint properly. There after on 07/11/08 another bill for Rs.762/- was received. Alleging deficiency in service the complainant has been filed for a direction to cancel the exceeded bills and to pay compensation.
 

(2) In the written version filed by the opposite party, it is contented that this Forum has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute relating the telephone billing. It is admitted that the telephone connection was provided to the complainant. On 07/09/08 bill for Rs.1598/- was issued to the complainant. The complainant lodged a complaint with a request for detailed bill. The complainant perused in detail and it was found that one Mobile phone No.9744182610 was originated from the particular phone during the relevant period frequently. On enquiry, the disputed number is familier to the complainant. Telephone allotted to the complainant is working by using Wireless in Local Loop(WLL) Technology. The WLL phone was switching from WLL MSC exchange at Ernakulam. When a WLL phone is installed in a house, the instrument is in the exclusive control of the inmates in the house. Hence it is clear that all the calls have been generated from her instrument. It was clearly shown that the complainant or the family members used to make calls to the aforesaid number. So the complainant was liable to pay the call charges made from her telephone. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
 

(3) The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to?
 

(4) The evidence consists of the oral testimony PW1 and PW2 and Exts.P1 and P2 on the side of the complainant and the testimony of DW1 and Exts.R1&R2 on the side of the opposite party.
 

(5) The POINT: The basis of the complaint is that somebody tapped the telephone line leading to the receiver of the complainant from outside her house and made calls without her knowledge, and same have been recorded in her account and charges realised. The main reason alleged by the complaint is that 141 calls to a particular mobile number that is 9744182610 recorded in the detailed call statement. The complainant as PW1 stated that a particular Mobile No. 9744182610 is known to the complainant and also stated that the complainant and her family have never called the said number. Ext P1 is the bills on 07/09/08 and 07/11/08. Ext P2 is the calls detailed report. In the cross-examination of PW1, it is stated that her phone is a WLL phone that is, Wireless in Local Loop. She has 2 children aged 12 years&9 years and stated that she is a CDS member, working in Kudumbasree unit. She had a Mobile phone also. According to the opposite party their investigation revealed that the disputed calls to telephone No.9744182610 were made from the complainants telephone. Ext R1 is the call detailed report dated 06/07/08 to 31/08/08. Ext R2 is the call detailed report dated 06/09/08 to 14/10/08. DW 1 stated that the disputed Mobile number was provided to one Mr. Saju, he is an Auto driver who carry the complainant's children to the school. His investigation revealed that there was no error in computer billing and no complaint in the line. The complainant has not reported the theft of her telephone instrument during the disputed period and stated that the calls were originated from the complainant's WLL phone itself. In the cross examination of DW1, it is stated that the WLL phone's exclusive control is the inmates of the house only. The WLL phone was switching from WLL MSC Exchange at Ernakulam. In this case the holder of the disputed Mobile number is examined as PW2. He stated that he is an Auto driver, who carry the PW1's children to the school. He had received large number of calls from several persons. In the cross examination he would state that some calls were received from the complainant's telephone and his mobile connection is Idea mobile. A telephone under WLL technology is turned to a particular frequency and no one can peep in to that frequency so as to misuse the phone. So no deficiency in service can be found against the opposite party so as to refund any excess amount from the bills and to make the opposite party liable to compensate the complainant.

In the result, the complaint is dismissed.

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 29th day of May,2009.

Sd/-

SMT.SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER)

Sd/-

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)

Sd/-

SMT. BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of Complainant :

PW1 - Kochurani Sebastian

PW2 - Saju

On the side of Opposite Parties :

DW1 - Rajkumar G

Exhibits:

On the side of Complainant:

Ext.P1series(a-b) - Bills dated 07/09/2008 and 07/11/2008

Ext.P2 - Copy of calls detailed report.

On the side of Opposite Parties :

Ext.R1 - Copy of calls detailed report dated 06/07/2008 to 31/08/2008.

Ext.R2 - Copy of calls detailed report dated 06/09/2008 to 14/10/2008.