DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
PATIALA.
Consumer Complaint No.399 of 21.9.2016
Decided on: 23.02.2017
Sukhdev Singh aged 45 years son of Sh.Balbir Singh R/o village Shashi Brahman Tehsil and District Patiala.
…………...Complainant
Versus
Airtel, through concerned official , office at Leela Bhawan, Opposite Gopal Sweets, Patiala through Manager.
…………Opposite Party
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Smt. Neena Sandhu, President
Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member
ARGUED BY:
Sh.Sukhdev Singh, complainant in person.
Opposite party ex-parte.
ORDER
SMT.NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT
Sh. Sukhdev Singh has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as the O.Ps.).The brief facts of the complaint are as under:
2. That the complainant became the consumer of Airtel connection in the year 2009 having connection bearing No.95010-45708. In the said connection 3G and 3G.B. data was free. The payment of the connection has been paying through bill. He is working in the department of Punjab police and the number is circulated in the group of police department. He has been making the payment of the bills regularly, approximately to the tune of Rs.600/- to Rs.700/- per month. One day he received a telephone call from Customer Care of the Airtel, who told that the bill for the month of August is Rs.1089 and the usage of the connection is excess. It adviced him for the change of the plan. It is also told that in the new plan he has to pay only Rs.399/- per month and maximum Rs.500/-. 1 GB 3 G data and 2G unlimited data was also available in the new plan. They immediately changed the plan without asking me any thing. On receipt of the bill to the tune of Rs.3855/- he was surprised and enquired about the same from the Customer Care of the Airtel. He also visited the office of the OPs at Patiala in this regard but to no effect. However, the OPs are harassing him regarding the payment of the bill failing which the connection shall be disconnected. It is therefore, prayed that the OPs be directed to send him the bill for the actual consumption and not to disconnect his telephone connection. Hence this complaint.
3. On being put to notice, the O.P failed to appear despite service and was accordingly proceeded against ex-parte.
4. In support of the complaint, the complainant tendered in evidence Ex. CA his sworn affidavit alongwith the documents Exs.C1 & C2 and closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the complainant and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
6. The complainant has averred that while switching over the plan the official of the Customer care centre told him that he would get the bill approximately, of Rs.399/- per month and maximum upto Rs.500/- in case of usage of unlimited data. However, to corroborate this fact he has not placed any document on record. Thus, in the absence of any cogent and convincing evidence, we do not find any substance in the averment made by the complainant. Consequently, we dismiss the complaint, being devoid of merit. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of cost under the rules. Thereafter file be indexed and consigned to the record room.
ANNOUNCED
DATED:23.02.2017
NEENA SANDHU
PRESIDENT
NEELAM GUPTA
MEMBER
