| Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BATHINDA C.C.No. 24 of 20.1.2022 Decided on : 28-02-2024 Vijay Kumar aged about 60 years S/o Ram Portap R/o Goniana Mandi, Tehsil & Distt. Bathinda. ........Complainant Versus Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Bibiwala Road, Bharat Nagar, Bathinda, through its General Manager. Bharat Sachar Nigam Limited, Branch Office at Goniana Mandi, Tehsil & Distt. Bathinda, through its S.D.E. (Commercial).
.......Opposite parties Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 QUORUM Smt.Priti Malhotra, President Smt.Sharda Attri, Member Present : For the complainant : Sh.Ram Manohar, Advocate. For opposite parties : Sh.Jasvir Singh, Advocate. ORDER Priti Malhotra, President The complainant Vijay Kumar (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (here-in after referred to as 'Act') before this Commission against Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and another (here-in-after referred to as opposite parties). Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant had obtained landline telephone connection No.0164-2262477 having account bearing No.1004277763 from opposite parties and had deposited the security amount of Rs.2000/- with them that is refundable at the time of surrender/disconnection of the connection. It is alleged that the complainant continued depositing bills issued by opposite parties and was not their defaulter. He has already surrendered/got disconnected the landline connection after clearing all the dues of opposite parties. Opposite parties were bound to refund the security amount of Rs.2000/- to the complainant at the time of disconnection/surrender of the telephone connection, but they have failed to refund the amount till date. It is further alleged that the complainant has been repeatedly requesting opposite parties to refund him security amount of Rs.2000/-, but they have failed to refund the security amount, although a period of six months has already elapsed. On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has prayed for directions to opposite parties to refund the security amount of Rs.2000/- with immediate effect and to pay Rs.60,000/- as compensation on account of mental tension, agony, botheration, harassment and humiliation and Rs.5500/- as litigation expenses. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing their written version and raised the legal objections that the complaint is not maintainable and complainant has no locus-standi or cause-of-action to file the complaint. The complainant does not fall under the definition of 'consumer' as defined under 'Act' as amended up to date as on his request, the connection was disconnected and after disconnection, no relationship exist between the parties and he cannot be deemed as 'consumer' of opposite parties. There is no deficiency on the part of opposite parties as on the request of complainant, the telephone connection was disconnected and Rs.1223/- being security has been refunded in the account of the complainant that was provided by him in the application for disconnection and refund of connection dated 7.6.2021 after adjusting the outstanding amount. As such, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. On merits, opposite parties have reiterated their version as taken in the legal objection as detailed above and controverted all other averments of the complainant and prayed for dismissal of complaint. In support of his complaint, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit dated 6.1.2022, (Ex.C1) and documents, (Ex.C2 to Ex.C7). In order to rebut the evidence of complainant, opposite parties have tendered into evidence affidavit of Kamalpreet Kaur dated 10.7.2023, (Ex.OP1/1) and documents, (Ex.OP1/2 to Ex.OP1/7). We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the file carefully. Learned counsel for complainant has reiterated his stand as taken in the complaint as detailed above. To support his averments, counsel for complainant has cited decision of Hon'ble State Commission, Haryana, Panchkula in case Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. Ram Rattan, First Appeal No.1188 of 2016, Decided on 6.7.2016. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite parties has submitted that as per Telephone Rules with Act, Rules, Orders, Digest, Guidelines and Case-Law (Incorporating orders received up to April, 1999), out of the security amount of Rs.2000/-, a sum of Rs.800/- was also adjusted for the installation charges. The calculation sheet also shows that before surrendering the telephone connection by the complainant, a sum of Rs.237/- was outstanding against the complainant upto 8.6.2021 and complainant deposited a sum of Rs.300/- against his outstanding amount of Rs.237/- on 17.7.2021 and balance amount of Rs.63/- was payable to the complainant by opposite parties and later on, opposite parties have refunded the security amount with balance amount of Rs.63/- i.e. Rs.1223/- on 22.2.2022 after deduction of Rs.800/- as installation charges from the security amount of Rs.2000/-, to the complainant. We have given careful consideration to these submissions. Admitted facts of the complaint are that the complainant obtained landline telephone connection No.0164-2262477 having account bearing No.1004277763 from opposite parties and deposited the security amount of Rs.2000/- with them that is refundable at the time of disconnection of the telephone connection. It is also admitted fact that the complainant has got disconnected the landline telephone connection after clearing all the dues of opposite parties and opposite parties were bound to refund the security amount to the complainant at the time of disconnection of the telephone connection. There is no dispute that the complainant applied for landline telephone connection and same was installed in his premises by opposite parties and Rs.2000/- was kept as a security amount with opposite parties. A perusal of record reveals that the complainant got disconnected his telephone connection vide moving application, (Ex.OP1/3) and as per rules, the security amount is refundable after disconnection of the telephone connection. The complainant had cleared his dues by paying a sum of Rs.300/- against his outstanding amount of Rs.237/- on 17.7.2021 and balance amount of Rs.63/- was payable to him by opposite parties, but opposite parties have refunded Rs.1223/- with balance amount of Rs.63/- on 22.2.2022 against security amount of Rs.2000/- to the complainant and balance amount of Rs.63/-. Opposite parties have refunded Rs.1223/- only to the complainant on 22.2.2022, but as per Rule No.3.13.1 of Telephone Rules with Act, Rules, Orders, Digest, Guidelines and Case-Law (Incorporating orders received up to April, 1999) placed on record by opposite parties, “as per the existing provisions on refund of security deposit, 100% refund of security deposit is to be made within 60 days, failing which 10% per annum interest is payable”. Moreover as per law cited by learned counsel for complainant in case Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, (Supra) total security amount is refundable to the complainant. Accordinlgy, opposite paties were bound to refund the total security amount of Rs.2000/- to the complainant within 60 days after disconnecting the telephone connection, but they have refunded only Rs.1223/- against the total security amount of Rs.2000/- and balance amount of Rs.63/-, to the complainant i.e. after about 5 months later from the stipulated period of 60 days and after filing of this complaint. Therefore, there is unfair trade practice on the part of opposite paties and opposite parties are liable to pay the balance security amount to the complainant with interest @10% per annum as per their rules after disconnection of the telephone connection. In view of what has been discussed above, present complaint is partly allowed against opposite parties. Opposite parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.840/- (Rs.2000/- plus Rs.63/-=Rs.2063/- minus Rs.1223/- already refunded amount =Rs.840/-) with interest @ 10 % per annum on the total security amount of Rs.2000/- from the date of disconnection till realization alongwith Rs.3000/- as cost and compensation to the complainant. The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room. Announced 28-02-2024 - (Priti Malhotra)
President (Sharda Attri) Member
| |
