Delhi

East Delhi

CC/555/2014

JAI PRAKASH - Complainant(s)

Versus

AIRTEL - Opp.Party(s)

23 May 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

C.C. NO. 555/14

 

Shri Jai Prakash Kumar Singh

S/o Late Shri Dharamnath Singh

R/o Flat No. 117, Jai Ambey Apartment,

New Kondli, Mayur Vihar Phase-III,

Delhi- 110096

                                                               ….Complainant

Vs.

M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd.

Customer Care Department

Plot No. 16, 2^nd Floor,

Udyog Vihar Phase-IV, Gurgaon Haryana    

                                                         …Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 19.06.2014

Judgement Reserved on: 23.05.2019

Judgement Passed on: 24.05.2019

 

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By: Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

JUDGEMENT

          The present complaint has been filed by Shri Jai Prakash Kumar Singh, complainant against M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd., OP under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

            Facts of the present complaint are that the complainant was allotted Airtel Connection number 9971566312 on submission of required documents with combo plan with monthly rental of Rs. 375 /-.

On 04.11.2013 the complainant received a message, where it was stated that he would be getting the facilities such as 3G GPRS services HBO, 1GB free, Aft1.317892GB 10% free_20 kbps, 10kb @ 3Ps_HBO, but OP started charging for the same from 02.11.2013. Another message was received on 05.11.2013 where the credit limit was set as Rs. 1,000/- subject to revision from time to time. It has been stated that on 18.11.2013, the complainant was informed through message that 3G GPRS service HBO had been stopped and OP continued to charge for the 3G, however,          Rs. 3330.1 had been waived off, which were charged towards the GPRS charges. On 20.12.2013 the complainant received another message stating that the outgoing services of his mobile had been temporarily suspended as there was usage of Rs. 2,139/-, which exceeded the credit limit. It has been stated by the complainant that OP was charging for the 3G usage alongwith other usage, whereas the complainant was entitled to free 1GB 3G data as per the plan, due to which his bill had exceeded the credit limit. Again the complainant received messages on 22.12.2013, 31.12.2013, 01.01.2014 and on subsequent dates where the complainant was asked to pay, as the usage had exceeded the credit limit for which reference number F54462280, F1421254225, F1421488577 was issued but the complaint was not resolved.

A letter dated 14.01.2014 was written by the complainant where the OP was informed that the complainant number had been barred 6 times within 2 months which was replied by e-mail, where the complainant was informed that OP had already adjusted an amount of Rs. 3,202.06 towards GPRS charges on 09.01.2014 so the total adjustment provided against the complainant’s mobile number was     Rs. 6,532.07 and no further reversal was feasible. The complainant has also stated that he received a letter dated 15.01.2014, where he was informed that his number had been temporarily disconnected w.e.f. 10.01.2014 as per the request and also due to reason that the said Airtel mobile number had got barred many times on account that the due amount had exceeded the credit limit. Complaint was made to Department of Telecommunication on 16.03.2014, in response to which the complainant received a reply dated  25.03.2014, where it was stated “as per our telephonic discussion dated 25.03.2014, we wish to inform you that on receipt of your complaint we have examined are records and found that  you have opted for 0, 1GB free EP/10 KB after 1.31789 2GB, 100% free,           40 kbps on your mobile number of 02.11.2013, however, due to some technical constraint you did not receive the 3G GPRS discounts against the respective invoices mentioned below. Further, wish to inform you that post identifying the issue we have done the necessary rectification and posted the complete adjustments of Rs. 7,158.25 (inclusive service tax) towards the 3G GPRS charges levied in your account against the given invoices and the details are as below:-

Invoice Date	Invoice Number	GPRS Charges	GPRS Adjustment (Inclusive service tax)
06.12.2013	266748405	Rs. 2,963.70	Rs. 3,330.01
06.01.2014	293458320	Rs. 2,849.82	Rs. 3,202.06
06.02.2014	321401913	Rs.557.58	Rs. 626.50

            After adjustment the current outstanding amount was Rs. 587.74 as on 25.03.2014. The complainant has stated that had OP followed the plan issued to the complainant there would not have been need to adjust/ waive the charges levied by OP, which has resulted in loss of reputation mental agony and harassment. Feeling aggrieved by the act/ omission on part of OP, the complainant has prayed for directions to OP to pay Rs. 3,36,540/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment.

            The complainant has annexed bills issued by OP from the period November, 2013 to January, 2014 and e-mails exchanged with OP.

            An application challenging the maintainability of the complaint before this Forum was filed by OP, which was dismissed on 12.02.2016. Written Statement was filed where it was submitted that the complainant had distorted the facts in order to misguide the Forum; the complaint was not maintainable before this Forum as it was barred by Section 7B of the Indian Telegraphs Act. It was submitted that the complainant had refused to make payments against the duly raised bills, which were issued for actual usage. It was further submitted that the bills issued were generated by “State of art billing system”; the disconnection of the number was due to outstanding bill exceeding the credit limit which was as per terms and conditions. It was also submitted that OP had waived Rs. 6,532.07 and a waiver of Rs. 3,202.6 was given on 14.01.2014. Rest of the contents of the complaint have been denied with prayer for dismissal of the same.

            Evidence by way of affidavit was filed by the complainant, who has deposed on oath the contents of his complaint. He has got exhibited copy of the bills as Ex.CW1/A; copy of e-mail communications between complainant and OP as Ex.CW1/B (Colly.).

            OP have got examined Shri Amit Bhatia, Senior Manager Legal, who has also reiterated the contents of their Written Statement on affidavit.

We have perused the material placed on record and have heard the submissions of Ld. Counsel for OP. The issue before us is regarding the billing of the GPRS services which were free up to 1GB of usage under the plan opted by complainant. If we look at bills dated 06.12.2013 and 06.01.2014, it is seen that Rs. 2,963.70 and Rs. 2,849.82 respectively have been charged in respect of the mobile internet usage. On the other hand, plain reading of      e-mail dated 25.03.2014, which has been written by OP, where it has been mentioned that in reference to the complaint made by the complainant to Department of Telecommunication (DOT) vide reference number DOTEL/E/2014/07420, it has been admitted by the OP that the complainant had opted for 0, 1GB free, 3p/10kb (after 1.317892 GB 100% free)_40kbps on his number on 2^nd November, 2014, however, due to some technical constraints the complainant did not receive the 3G GPRS discounts against the bills issued in the month of December, 2013, January, 2014 and February, 2014 and post adjustment the outstanding amount was               Rs. 587.74. Thus, it is clear that the complainant was billed for the 3G services which he should have got free upto 1GB of usage. It was only after the complainant registered his complaint with Department of Telecommunications, his amount was adjusted, this definitely amounts to deficiency in services as well as unfair trade practice.

Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present complaint, we direct OP to pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment.

This order be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order.

Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

            File be consigned to Record Room.

 

     

 (DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                                                  (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

          Member                                                                               Member    

                                       (SUKHDEV SINGH)

                                            President