Date of filing : 30-06-2011
Date of order : 30 -11-2011
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC. 149/2011
Dated this, the 30th day of November 2011
PRESENT
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER
SMT.K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
M.T.Thomas, } Complainant
Mattamudayil Veedu,
Vazathattu,
Muttomkadavil.Po,
Parappa .Via,
Kasaragod.Dt. 671533
(In Person)
1. Ashok kumar.P.K. } Opposite parties
D.S.A, Kannur, No.323,
Sahayi Sreekrishna Complex,
Onden Road, Kannur.
2. Sahayi, Padinharaveetil,
Mayanadu, Kozhikkode.
3. Junior Engineer, B.S.N.L,
Telephone Exchange, Balal.
4. General Manager, Telecom District,
BSNL Bhavan, Kannur. 67002.
O R D E R
SRI.K.G.BEENA, MEMBER
The case of the complainant Sri.M.T.Thomas is that when he visited BSNL office at Konnakkad, he met the representative of M/s Sahayi, Franchise of M/s Novatium with whom BSNL had a tie up at corporate level for supplying PCS and offering internet services (NETPC). The complainant is attracted by the scheme and paid 2259/- to M/s Sahayi on 12-05-2010 with a condition to supply computer within 60 days. But yet neither computer is supplied nor amount is refunded. Hence the complaint.
2. Notice to opposite parties 1 & 2 returned unserved and paper publication was given against opposite parties 1 &2. According to opposite parties 3 & 4 it is true that MT Thomas has paid `2259/- to M/s Sahayi for Nova Net PC connection. BSNL had a tie up at Corporate level for supplying PCS and offering internet services (NETPC) corporate office. BSNL is not directly involving with the customers in registration and supplying the NETPC. The amount collected by M/s Sahayi, Franchisee of M/s.Novatium is utilized by them for providing NETPC and subsequent internet services offered. BSNL came to know about the non supply of the ‘NOVANET PC’ only after receiving a letter from the complainant addressed to the Assistant General Manager on 26-10-2010. Though BSNL is not directly involved in this issue, action has been initiated to settle the grievance of the complainant.
3. Complainant is examined as PW1. Exts A1 to A5 marked. JTO represented opposite parties 3 & 4 has no oral evidence. Ext.B1 marked. Heard both sides and documents perused. While perusing documents. Ext.A1 is a brochure namely “BSNL Nova Net PC” including attractive offers to BSNL customers. Ext.A2 is the receipt given by M/s Sahayi for receiving `2,259/- from MT Thomas. Ext.A3 is the copy of the complaint given by MT Thomas to Assistant General manager dated 26-10-2010. Ext.A4 is the copy of the complaint given by MT Thomas to General Manager. Ext.A5 is the reply for the complaint from Assistant General Manager, Kannur. Ext.B1 is the copy of the minutes of the meeting regarding issues of USOF Bundling Scheme of M/s Novatium.
4. Those who read brochure Ext.A1 will definitely give money. Their advertisement is that “Free, BSNL Broad Band Connection”. The main features are:- 24x 7 customer support self Healing Technology, complete protection from virus, life time warranty etc. Complainant’s son who is studying in the Xth standard was compelling the complainant for purchasing a computer as it is very helpful in his project work. Thus expecting computer with net connection within 60 days of payment, complainant paid money. Thereafter the complainant has no information regarding the supply of computer. Complainant has given complaints to Asst. General Manager and General Manager send a reply that they have initiated action against M/s Novatium. But no relief is granted so far.
5. In this case misusing the trust towards BSNL, M/s Sahayi introduced Nova Net PC to the customers of BSNL. Now M/s Sahayi is not available in the number and address given to customers. In the version filed by opposite parties 3 & 4 it is stated that there was a tie up between BSNL & M/s Novatium at corporate level for supplying PCS and offering internet services. It is also stated in the version of opposite parties 3 & 4 that BSNL has already initiated action to settle the grievance of the complainant. Except informing this to the complainant, could BSNL settled the grievance of the complainant. It is a true and genuine complaint opposite parties grab money from the customers of BSNL, using the office and staff of BSNL. So BSNL cannot escape from the liability towards customers. Now opposite parties 1 & 2 are not available in the address given to complainant. Opposite parties 3 & 4 can only trace out opposite parties 1 & 2. After the meeting held with M/s Novatium on 9-6-2011, what steps did opposite parties 3 & 4 adopted to settle the grievance of the complaint after these 5 months is clearly there is deficiency of service on the part of M/s. Novatium. Opposite parties 3 & 4 can refund the amount to customers and can settle the matter with M/s Novatium. If there is violation of agreement on the part of M/s. Novatium, opposite parties 3 & 4 can take legal steps against M/s Novatium.
Therefore the complaint is allowed and opposite parties 3 & 4 is directed to refund `2,259/- with a compensation of `2000/- within 30 days from the date of this order. Failing which 9% interest shall be charged to `2,259/- from the date of complaint till payment.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1. Notice.
A2. 12-05-2011 Receipt issued by Sahayi.
A3.26-10-2010 copy of letter sent by complainant to OP.
A4. 10-03-2011 letter sent by complainant to GM. BSNL, Kannur.
B1.Minutes
PW1. M.T. Thomas.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER
Forwarded by Order
Pj/
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
