Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/286/2007

Faith Home Ministry - Complainant(s)

Versus

AOTR SW V Chennai Telephones - Opp.Party(s)

V.Yurendrakumar

20 Dec 2017

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   11.04.2007

                                                                        Date of Order :   20.12.2017

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU. M.MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B. M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT            

                  TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

             DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

C.C.NO.286/2007

WEDNESDAY THIS 20^th  DAY OF DECEMBER 2017

Faith Home Ministry,

By Sarah E.L.V.Lavanya,

Founder & Managing Trustee,

Plot No.32-33 Venkatapuram PO.

Singaperumal Koil via Chengalpattu.                           Complainant

                                        ..Vs..

 

AOTR SW V Chennai Telephones,

No.808 Anna Salai,

Chennai 35.                                                          Opposite party.

 

Counsel for Complainant           :    M/s. V.Vurenderakumar          

Counsel for opposite party        :    M/s. D.Saravanan & another      

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to rectify the defect of dead telephone  and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- for the deficiency of service and gross negligence and to pay  a sum of Rs.20,000/- for mental agony and Rs.3,000/- as cost of the complaint.

 

1. The averment of the complaint in brief are as follows:

         The complainant submit that the complainant is a subscriber of the telephone No.2746 4888 installed on 12.9.2002 for an orphanage having 15 minor children and five illiterate elders.    The complainant further state that he was even unable to use the monthly free calls as she would be in Chennai and other places often collecting donation for her orphanage.  The complainant was saddled with huge bills of Rs.1274/- vide bill No.41258970, Rs.839/- etc and the pole itself broke down.   The complaint given for the broken pole ended in temporary arrangement without any permanent structure till date even after 28.2.2006.  The complainant’s phone failed to work on 1.10.2005, 1.11.2005, 1.12.2005 and 1.1.12006 due to incessant rains.    Even though there is no proper connection and the telephone frequently dead.  Since the opposite party has not come forward to rectify  and solve the problem.   As such the act of  the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.  Hence this complaint is filed.

 

2.    The brief averments in the Written Version filed by the  opposite party is  as follows:

      The  opposite party deny each and every allegations except those that are specifically admitted herein.    It is submitted that the telephone connection to the complainant is working in a farthest remote Mountain surrounded place at about 6 k.m meter from the exchange  where no infrastructure is available to provide telecom service.   Due to heavy pressure from the complainant side and also the complainant being an orphanage the line was provided with great difficulty through the present working system with concurrence of the complainant.    The opposite party further state that  the opposite party never charged any extra amount beyond the calls and rental charges in the respective bill.   In spite of all to provide permanent fault free service to the complainant telephone, the subscriber was asked to give offer to take WLL FWT connection and no action were taken on the complaints are all does not arise.   The amount will be adjusted in the subsequent bills.   Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as her evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 marked.  Proof affidavit of opposite party filed and Ex.B1 and Ex.B7 marked on the side of the  opposite party.

4.   The points for the consideration is: 

Whether the complainant is entitled to rectify the defects of telephone and put up a permanent structure as prayed for?

 

Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.10,000/- for the deficiency  of service and Rs.20,000/- for mental agony with cost of Rs.3,000/- as prayed for ?

 

 

5.      POINTS 1 & 2:

         

 

          The complainant filed written arguments.  The opposite party has not filed any written arguments.   Both parties has not turned up to advance any oral arguments.   Perused the records.(viz) complaint, written version, proof affidavit, and documents.  Admittedly the complainant is a subscriber of the telephone No.2746 4888 installed on 12.9.2002 for an orphanage having 15 minor children and five illiterate elders.   Further the contention of the complainant is that the service of the telephone connection is more important for due communication to the world.  Since frequently the telephone is a dead caused great inconvenience.   Further the complainant contended that even after repeated requests and demands and sending letters the opposite party authorities turned a deaf ear.  The opposite party advised the complainant  to have WLL FWT connection to solve the problem  but it is not denied that even such connection are also futile.  Further the contention of the complainant is that admittedly the telephone pole was broken-down and the lines are not in intact.   Further the contention of the complainant is that even though there is no proper connection and the telephone frequently dead,    resulting severe communication problem the opposite party also has not come forward to rectify  and solve the problem;  The bill claimed is exorbitant and baseless. Hence   the complainant is constrained to file this case  claiming compensation.

6.     The contention raised by the opposite party in his written version is that the  telephone connection to the complainant is working in a farthest remote Mountain surrounded place at about 6 km meter from the exchange  where is no infrastructure is available to provide telecom service.   Due to heavy pressure from the complainant side,  the service connection is provided.    Further the opposite party pleaded that the officials of the opposite party used to attend and clear the fault then and there with great difficulty without any hesitation.    It is not in dispute the fact that frequently the telephone connection remain dead due to shortage of connection.  The alternative remedy of WLL FWT suggested also negative by the complainant resulting such great hardship.  But it is an admitted fact that the opposite party can also provide cardless telephone.   Further it is not disputed that the opposite party has collected the dues related the telephone charges.  But it is very clear that the telephone connection is dead for majority hours and days.    Further the opposite party produced the documents to show that the excess amount collected and adjusted but is only for subsequent period of the case.    Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this forum is of the considered view that the  opposite party is directed to rectify the defect of the dead telephone connection and put up a permanent structure to prevent such recurrence of dead telephone connection and  shall pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/-  to the complainant and the points are answered accordingly.

In the result the complaint is allowed in part.  The  opposite party is directed to rectify the defect of dead telephone and put up a permanent structure to prevent such recurrence of dead telephone and  shall pay compensation of Rs.10,000/-  (Rupees Ten thousand only) for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/-  (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant. 

The aboveamounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a to till the date of payment.

 

Dictated by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the  20th    day  of  December  2017.  

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s side documents:

Ex.A1-  8.4.2008   - Copy of bill.

Ex.A2- 6.6.2006    - Copy of complainant’s letter.

Ex.A3- 8.6.2008    - Copy of bill.

Ex.A4- 8.8.2006    - Copy of bill.

Ex.A5-                 - Copy of August 2006 call details.

Ex.A6- 8.12.2006  - Copy  of bill.

Opposite parties’ side document: -     

Ex.B1- 27.8.2007  - Copy of letter correspondence with opp. party.

Ex.B2- 5.4.2010    - Copy of letter from opp. party to complainant.

Ex.B3- 17.3.2017  - Copy of letter correspondence with opp. party.

Ex.B4- 12.10.2007         - Copy of telephone bill.

Ex.B5- 12.10.2007         - Copy of telephone bill.

Ex.B6- 12.6.2008  - Copy of telephone bill.

Ex.B7- 12.8.2008  - Copy of telephone bill.

 

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.