Date of Filing:15.09.2008<br /> Date of Order:25.02.2009<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2009<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2020 OF 2008<br /> <br /> <br /> Divya Sharma,<br /> A 405 Sterling Residency,<br /> RMV II Stage Dollars Colony,<br /> New BEL Road,<br /> Bangalore. Complainant<br /> <br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> Bharti Airtel Limited (A Bharti Enterprises)<br /> Registered Office:<br /> Qutub Ambience (at Qutub Minar), <br /> Mehrauli Road, New Delhi. <br /> Circle Office: # 55, <br /> Divya Shree Towers,<br /> Bannerghatta Main Road,<br /> Bangalore-560029. Opposite Party<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed by the complainant stating that, she is working with IBM Airtel promoted their data as being the best in the market and she purchased the same for Rs.6,099/-. The complainant submitted that data card was having international roaming facility. In July-2008 she had to travel to Hungary on business and prior to that she called call center several times to enquire on the process of activating international roaming and charges thereon and taking and she was told that there was no roaming charges on data down load. Hence she took the option of getting international roaming activated and taking with her. She was shocked to see an unbilled usage of Rs.32,000/- when she came back from Hungary, she immediately called call center, she was told that the amount was just an unbilled one. She received bill for Rs. 37,281/- much to horror. She raised the issue with the Airtel customer service ombudsman and Chairman at Airtel. So far she has not received any resolution. She informed the opposite party that the matter will be taken to Consumer Court and abide by the orders of Court and she is not going to pay any late fee. Therefore, she prayed that bill be corrected to the actual amount and needs to be paid as per the data down load charges and the rent on international roaming charges and the Airtel to refund the amount of Rs.6,099/- and Rs.4,000/- deposited amount.<br /> <br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite party. Opposite party put in appearance through Advocate and filed defense version admitting that the complainant has paid Rs.6,099/- and also deposited Rs.4,000/-. The bill dated 12/08/2008 issued for Rs.37,287 is based on actual usage by the complainant. Complainant had been to abroad i.e., Hungary during July-2008 and use the internet service in abroad under international roaming facility. Having used facility complainant cannot question the tariff of the opposite party when it comes to payment of the bill amount. In spite of request to pay the bill complainant persisted for waiving the bill amount without any basis and same is not permissible. The complainant has approached the Hon’ble Forum by making unwarranted allegations against the opposite party. However, it is submitted that opposite party is always ready to refund the deposit amount subject complainant clearing the outstanding bill and upon surrendering data card as per procedure. <br /> <br /> 3. Affidavit evidences are filed. Arguments are heard.<br /> REASONS<br /> 4. Perused the documents. It is a very simple case. Almost all the facts are admitted. It is an admitted case of the parties that complainant is working with IBM India and she purchased Airtel data card by paying Rs.6,099/-. It is also an admitted case of the parties that the complainant has made a deposit of Rs.4,000/-. The opposite party has fairly, correctly and rightly submitted that it is ready and willing to refund the deposit amount and also Rs.6,099/- paid towards data card subject to the complainant surrendering data card as per the procedure. The bone of contention between the parties is that the opposite party had been charged Rs.32,691/- as roaming charges in the bill dated 12/08/2008. The total bill amount is Rs.37,287/-. This includes monthly charges and taxes. It is also an admitted case that the complainant had been to Hungary and she had used the internet service in abroad. On the backside of the bill dated 12/08/2008 the details of use of internet has been mentioned. On 13/07/2008, 14/07/2008, & 17/07/2008, three days the facility was used. The GPRS and duration volume and particulars of the bill for each duration volume have been clearly mentioned and shown in the roaming statement by the opposite party in the bill. In this way the total value added is shown as Rs.32,691/-. The complainant who was present in person at the time of arguments submitted that, she is ready to settle the issue and wants to close the matter since she does not want to continue with the litigation. She wants the matter once for all to be closed. So that she will be free from tension and from any kind of harassment and mental agony. The complainant submitted that she had received notice from the opposite party asking her to go for mediation center for settlement of the issue. She also submitted that she is receiving telephone calls from the opposite party demanding the payment of bill and settlement of the issue at an early date. Therefore, the complainant submits that she may be given some concession or rebate. So that she may pay the bill and clear the issue. The complainant submitted that she is a regular customer of the Airtel and she is having mobile connection and other facility taken from the opposite party. The learned Advocate for the opposite party who is also present and submitted that opposite party never denied the refund of deposit amount and also the price of data card 6099 subject to the surrender of the card. The Forum asked the learned Advocate for the opposite party for giving concession in the bill, the learned Advocate submits that he has no instructions from the company and he cannot give any assurances on behalf of the company in respect of giving rebate or concession in the bill. The complainant submitted that she was informed by the staff of the opposite party that there will no roaming charges on data down load. Therefore, she took the option of getting international roaming activity. However, the complainant is now ready to pay the bill and settle the issue, she wants some concession. It is an admitted case of the opposite party that no efforts so far had been taken for recovery of the bill amount. The opposite party had taken the matter to the mediation center for settlement. It appears that the matter has not been settled there also. Therefore, taking into consideration of all the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the complainant it would be just, fair and reasonable to give 50% concession in the bill dated 12/08/2008. The opposite party is having Rs.6,099 + 4000 as deposit and that amount can be adjusted towards the bill due. The total disputed bill amount is Rs.37,287/-. Out of this amount if Rs.10,099/- is deducted (appropriated) the balance comes to Rs.27,188/-. It would be just, fair and proper to order the complainant to pay Rs.10,000/- towards the outstanding bill and close the matter. The opposite party in this way gets Rs.20,099/- i.e., more than 50% of the bill amount. I feel it is just, fair and proper order. Consumer Protection Act is a social and benevolent legislation, intended to protect the better interest of the consumers. Consumer is the most important visitor to the premises of the service provider, he/she is not dependent on the service provider and on the other hand the service providers are dependent on the consumers. The complainant being a regular customer of the opposite party she deserves some concession and rebate. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:-<br /> ORDER<br /> 5. The complaint is allowed. The complainant is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- and surrender the data card to the opposite party and the opposite party shall close the issue in respect of bill No.803632437 dated 12/08/2008.<br /> 6. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 7. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2009. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER<br /> Rhr.,<br />