Karnataka

Bangalore 4th Additional

CC/15/10

Talwinder G.S. - Complainant(s)

Versus

ACT FIBERNET - Opp.Party(s)

17 Apr 2018

ORDER

Complaint filed on: 03.01.2015

                                                      Disposed on: 17.04.2018

 

BEFORE THE IV ADDL DISTRICT

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BENGALURU

 1^ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027       

 

 

CC.No.10/2015

DATED THIS THE 17^th APRIL OF 2018

PRESENT

 

 

SRI.S.L.PATIL, PRESIDENT

SMT.N.R.ROOPA, MEMBER

 

Complainant/s: -                           

Talwinder G.S.,

C.G.O.H.

D-17, Domlur, Bangalore-71.

 

In person     

 

V/s

Opposite party/s

Respondent/s:-

 

ACT FIBERNET

Atria Convergence Technologies Private Ltd.,

Trade Centre, No.29/4, 4^th Floor, Race Course Road, Bangalore-560 001.

Rep by its Managing Director.

 

By Adv.Sri.S. Vinod

 

PRESIDENT: SRI.S.L.PATIL

1.       This complaint has been filed by the complainant as against the Opposite Party (herein after referred as OP) directing to refund a sum of Rs.1260/- being the amount paid by her. Further to direct the OP to return the documents (Photo ID, address proof and his photo) along with the written assurance that these documents are not copied, circulated or misused by the ACT FIBERNET Company. Further directed the OP to compensate an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- for mental harassment.

          2.       The brief facts of the case of the complainant are that she had applied for ACT company broad band connection on 20.10.2014. One of their rep (his name is Sheeju) took a photo of her official ID with mobile, one photograph (which was a joint photo of herself and her husband) and one BSNL bill as address proof. She paid Rs.1260/- to him and he gave her the receipt for Rs.1258/-. She was told that connection will be given in three working days. After that she got a call that her ID proof (PHOTO ID) is not valid as per their company norms (As she has mentioned above that she gave her official ID as proof which had been issued from Ministry of Home Affairs). As per their new demand, she had to give another photo id proof which can be a copy her passport/pan card/ form 16, which she refused. Then she received an SMS on 22.10.2014 saying that we are not currently available in your area and will notify when we are. Then she called Sheeju and asked him to return her money. He told that it will be sent by courier within 10 days. She did not receive anything. On 29.11.2014, she received one more SMS from their company stating that her ID has been accepted and connection will be given within 10 days, but, no results. Again she received another SMS on 3.12.2014 from their company which says-thanks for paying subscription amount of Rs.1258/- for user ID No.1090538 sender AD-ACTTEL.

          3.       The complainant submits that as she has not got any connection from their end. She received an SMS on 10.12.2014 mentioning (Dear customer your request No.0003310679 is registered and will be attended shortly. T & C apply. Sender GM_ACTGRP). She wrote an e-mail to them on 10.12.2014 that she needs to know what is going as ASAP. She gave one standing instruction as PLEASE GIVE ME YOUR REPLY through E-mail only. The complainant submits that she will not entertain any phone call regarding this matter. The complainant submits that she should be given befitted reply by 15.12.2014. The complainant submits that as the answer of her e-mail, she received e-mail dt.12.12.2014 that they have raised a request for refund which will be delivered through courier within 15 days, but she has not received any amount. On 19.12.2014, she sent another e-mail to settle the matter in 2-3 days. The complainant submits that the OP has forced her to take legal action. Hence, this complaint.

          4.       The receipt of notice, the OP did appear and filed the version denied the allegations made by her in the complaint. But the OP admits that the complainant applied for broadband connection on 20.10.2015 and one of the sales executive of the OP processed the application form and took a passport size photo, photo copy of ID of Ministry of Home affairs and photo copy of BSNL bill as an address proof document of complainant. Further, it is denied by the OP that their sales executive has taken a joint photograph of complainant and her husband. Thereafter, admittedly the OP has informed the complainant over the telephone call that her ID proof is not valid as per the norms. It is submitted that the ID document submitted by the complainant are not acceptable as per the letter bearing No.842-725/2005-VAS (pt) dt.7.10.2009 of Government of India Ministry of Communications and IT and the same was informed to the complainant on 29.11.2014 by the OP and demanded a valid ID proof document, then the complainant refused to submit valid ID proof document and her application form was kept pending for approval. It is false that on 22.10.2014, the OP has sent a SMS to the complainant saying that they are not currently available in your area and will notify when we are and further it is false that the complainant received a SMS that her ID has been accepted and connection will be given within 10 days.

          5.       The OP further submits that on 29.11.2014, he has sent two SMS to the complainant vide message ID No.28007491 stating that the account creation along with Account ID details vide Account No.1090538 only for the acceptance of subscription amount paid by the complainant for the broadband connection and on 3.12.2014, the OP sent another SMS of payment acknowledgement for sum of Rs.1258/- vide payment No.3010793.

          6.       The Op submits that the constant follow ups by him to obtain valid ID proof document from the complainant are all went in vain. On 10.12.2014, the complainant wrote an e-mail to the OP for refund of subscription amount of Rs.1258/-. The OP has agreed to refund and informed her that the process of refund of subscription amount will take 15 days time and a Ticket No.3310679 was raised through e-mail for refund the subscription amount.

          7.       The OP submits that after receiving request e-mail for refunding of subscription amount, the OP’s “Refund Department” made several telephone calls to the complainant and sought for her bank details to initiate the process of refund of subscription amount of Rs.1258/-, the conversation between the complainant and OP regarding to furnish the bank details of complainant to initiate transfer of refund, the subscription amount is recorded in the CD. Again on 19.12.2014, the complainant sent an e-mail for refund of the subscription amount without her bank details and the OP’s ‘Refund Department Team’ replied and requested for her bank details.

          8.       The OP is running broadband service business under the statutory guidance of Government of India, Ministry of communications and IT and Ministry of Home Affairs and they have to comply the statutory guidance, the complainant failed to provide her identification proof document to process her application for providing broadband services to her and thereby his application for subscribing broadband connection was kept pending. It is submitted that when the complainant sought for refund of subscription amount, the OP has agreed to refund and requested for her bank details to transfer the said amount via internet banking, the complainant did not provide her bank details, hence, the subscription amount was not paid to her. Now she has approached this Forum claiming unreasonable compensation.

          9.       The OP submits that the complainant is not entitled for any relief as sought in the complaint and the OP is not liable to pay any compensation to the complaint for her own fault. The complainant has filed the complaint with an intention to harass the OP and for wrongful gain, hence, the complainant’s relief cannot be awarded as she has not approached this Forum with clean hands. Hence, the OP prays to dismiss the complaint.

          11.     The complainant filed her affidavit evidence got marked as Ex-P1 to P6. The OP has examined one of its witness got marked as D1 and D2 and closed aside. 

          12.     The complainant as well as the OP filed written argument.

          13.     Heard both the sides.

          14.     The points that arise for our consideration are:

          1) Whether the complainants prove the deficiency in service on the 

              part of the OP?

          2) What Order?

 

          15.  Our answers to the above points are as under:

 

Point No.1 : Affirmative

Point No.2 : As per the final order for the following

 

REASONS

          16. POINT NO.1:  We have briefly stated the contents of the complaint as well as the version filed by the OP. The undisputed facts which reveals from the pleading of the parties to the lis goes to show that the OP has admitted in respect of the complainant applied for broadband connection on 20.10.2015. One of the sale executive of the OP furnished the said application form and took a passport size photo, photo copy of ID of Ministry of Home affairs and photo copy of BSNL bill as a address proof document of the complainant. In respect of connecting the said broadband, the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.1260/- and received the receipt.

          17.     The main contention taken by the OP is that at no point of time, it had taken the joint photograph of the complainant and her husband. On receipt of the application, the ID documents furnished by the complainant are not accepted as per the letter bearing No. 842-725/2005-VAS (pt) dt.7.10.2009 of Government of India Ministry of Communications and IT and the same was informed to the complainant on 29.11.2014 by the OP and demanded a valid ID proof document. Then the complainant refused to submit valid ID proof document, hence, her application form was kept pending for approval. This fact has been specifically informed to the complainant, but she did not furnish the relevant documents to process the same. In our considered view, if the Op has specifically informed to the complainant what are the documents to be required for obtaining the broadband connection, in that event, the complainant was in a position to furnish the better particulars. In this context, we find there is a deficiency of service on the part of the OP as they postponed the connection of the broadband. But anyhow, the OP in Para-7 of its version specifically stated that it is ready to refund the amount paid by the complainant. When such being the fact, this Forum has no other go to accept to direct the OP to refund the amount of Rs.1260/- paid by the complainant.

          18.     With regard to the return of the documents, which are Photo ID, address proof,   photo of the complainant along with the written assurance that these documents are not copied, circulated or misused by the ACT FIBERNET Company. Furnishing of these documents to the OP, except the joint photo, they have not specifically denied it. In this context, if we direct the OP to return the said documents as stated in Para-2 of the prayer, we hope that no prejudice will be caused to the OP. With regard to the compensation is concerned, the complainant has sought for an amount of Rs.2,50,000/-. This claim is appears imaginary. Hence, we are of the opinion that if an amount of Rs.1000/- is fixed being the compensation along with cost of Rs.1000/- being litigation expenses ends of justice would met sufficiently. Accordingly, we come to the conclusion that there is deficiency of service on the part of the OP.   Accordingly, we answered this point in the affirmative.

          19.     POINT NO.2: In the result, we proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainants is allowed. The Opposite Party is directed to return an amount of Rs.1260/- being the amount paid for broadband connection to the complainant. We also direct the Opposite Party to return the documents (photo ID, address proof and photo if any of the complainant. We also direct the Opposite Party to pay an amount of Rs.1000/- being compensation along with cost of Rs.1000/- being litigation expenses to the complainant with 6 weeks from the receipt of this Order. Failing which, the said amount carries interest at 6% p.a. from the date of this Order.  We also direct the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.1000/- being the cost of litigation.

Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.

          (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by her/him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the open forum on 17^th April 2018).

 

 

 

(ROOPA.N.R)     MEMBER	(S.L.PATIL)  PRESIDENT

 

         

 

 

1. Witness examined on behalf of the complainant/s by way of affidavit:

 

Smt.Talwinder G.S., who being the complainant was examined. 

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:

Ex-P1	Nodal Officer E-mail dt.12.10.2014
Ex-P2	Nodal Officer E-mail dt.19.12.2014
Ex-P3	Nodal Officer E-mail
Ex-P4	Act Application Form
Ex-P5	Hard copy of sms from Act-Fibernet

 

2. Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite party/s Respondent/s by way of affidavit:

Sri.Suresh Babu C.N., who being the Authorized Signatory of OP was examined.

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of OP

Ex-D1	The photocopy of the Government letter dt.7.10.2009
Ex-D2	The voice recording CD.

 

 

 

(ROOPA.N.R)     MEMBER

(S.L.PATIL)   PRESIDENT