DATE OF FILING : 15.9.2010
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI
Dated this the 29th day of October, 2010
Present:
SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT
SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER
SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER
C.C No.201/2010
Between
Complainant : V.R. Sankarapillai,
Vazhayil House,
President,
Cable T.V. Consumers Association,
Kolapra, Kudayathoor P.O.,
Idukki District – 685 590.
(By Adv: V.C. Sebastian)
And
Opposite Party : Babu,
Edamulayil House,
Proprietor,
SONIC Satellite Connection,
Palanickal Building,
G.H.S. Junction,
Kolapra, Kudayathoor P.O.,
Idukki District – 685 590.
(By Advs: Lissi M.M. & Biju Joseph)
O R D E R
SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)
The complainant is a member of the Consumers Association of the Cable TV subscribers. 51 complainants are availing the Cable TV connection from the opposite party's satellite connection in the name and style of 'Sonic Satellite Connection'. The 1st complainant is the president of the association. The opposite party is not transmitting Asianet, Asianet Plus, and Asianet News through their Cable TV net work connection for the last 30 days. So the complainants and their association informed the opposite party on 22.7.2010, that if the opposite parties are not supplying the specific channel or not transmitting the same, they are not liable to pay Rs.140/- to the opposite party as the subscription charge. The opposite party replied that they would think about the same. Without any notice to the consumers, on 8.8.2010, the Cable TV connection of Mr.V.J.Sebastian, who is the member of this association was disconnected by the opposite party. When enquired about the same, the opposite party told that if the complainants are not paying the monthly subscription of Rs.140/-, the connection of the other subscribers will also be disconnected. The complainants are ready to pay monthly subscription of Rs.140/- if the opposite party transmits Asianet, Asianet Plus and Asianet News through their Cable net work and it is also informed that otherwise they will pay only Rs.100/- as subscription charge. In all other neighbouring Cable net work such as ETV, CTV, they are transmitting all these channels including Aianet, Asianet Plus and Asianet News with monthly subscription of Rs.100/-. So this petition is filed for getting direction against the opposite party for transmitting or supplying Asianet, Asianet Plus and Asianet News channels.
2. As per the written version filed by the opposite party, it is stated that this Forum is not having jurisdiction to maintain the complaint. All the activities of the Cable TV net work business are under the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997. So an appellant tribunal is formed for the execution of disputes, as Trisbute Settlement and Appellate Tribunal, TDSAT. So this dispute can be considered in that tribunal only. It is submitted that the opposite party is having a satellite Cable TV connection and distribution. There is no such an association formed for the consumers of the Cable TV net work. Asianet, Asianet Plus, Asuanet News, etc. were “free to air channels” and these are turned to “paid channels”. It was demanded from the Cable TV operators to pay Rs.20/month for each connection for getting transmission of the same. So the Asianet Communications were decided to disconnect the transmission on 2.6.2010. But after filing a complaint by the Confederation of Consumer Vigilance Centre, before TDSAT, the Asianet Communications re-instated the transmission of the channels Asianet, Asianet News and Asianet Plus on 23.6.2010 onwards and that matter was decided on 18.8.2010. So these channels were disconnected only from 2.6.2010 to 23.6.2010 from these subscribers. The subscription charge for the Cable TV channels are decided by the TRAI, as per the tariff order, 35 pay channels and 30 free to air channels are supplying to the consumers in the rate of Rs.250/month, but the opposite party is charging only Rs.140/- from the consumers. The opposite party is entitled to disconnect the Cable TV connection if the consumers are making dues to the monthly subscription. So this petition is not at all maintainable and may be dismissed.
3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to?
4. There is no oral evidence adduced by both the parties.
5. The POINT :- Before going to the evidence of the case, the matter was heard from both sides.
As per the complainant, the opposite party denied the transmission of Asianet, Asianet Plus and Asianet News channels from the last 30 days onwards. So the complainants who are the members of the association of the consumers of the Cable TV subscription decided to pay only Rs.100/month because of the non-availability of the above said prime channels. The opposite party also disconnected the connection of one Mr.V.J. Sebastian, because of the non-payment of the amount and also threatened to disconnect the connection of the other subscribers. But they are ready to pay Rs.140/-, if the opposite party is supplying the transmission of Asianet, Asianet Plus and Asianet News. As per the opposite party, they have disconnected the transmission of Asianet, Asianet Plus and Asianet News only from 2.6.2010 onwards and it was re-instated from 23.6.2010 onwards. That was only because of the act of the Asianet Communications and not by the opposite party. The rate fixed by the TRAI for the Cable TV subscribers is Rs.250/month for 35 pay channels and 30 free to air channels. Here they are receiving only Rs.140/- for each connection.
It is admitted by the opposite party that they have disconnected transmission of Asianet, Asianet News and Asianet Plus from 2.6.2010 onwards for 21 days. But it was because of the act of the Asianet Communications and not by the deficiency from the part of opposite party. The opposite party and their association filed petition before the TDSAT and it was re-instarted from 23.6.2010 onwards. As per the complainants, they are also ready to pay Rs.140/- if the opposite party is supplying the above said channels to them. So we think that the complainants are ready to pay Rs.140/month if the above said 3 channels are also transmitting by the opposite party. The opposite party has admitted that they are ready to provide the same with Rs.140/-.
Hence the petition partially allowed. The opposite party is directed to provide the Cable TV net work connection including Asianet, Asianet Plus and Asianet News to the complainants regularly by receiving monthly subscription of Rs.140/- each from the complainants. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- as cost of this petition within one month of receipt of a copy of this order failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest per annum from the date of default.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 29th day of October, 2010
Sd/-
SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)
Sd/-
SMT. SHEELA JACOB (MEMBER)
Sd/-
SMT. BINDHU SOMAN (MEMBER)
APPENDIX
Nil.
