DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JHARSUGUDA

                                                            CONSUMER  COMPLAINT  CASE NO. 71 OF 2016

Dilip Agarwal,

S/O: Biswanath Agarwal,

R/O: Main Road, Brajrajnagar,

PO/PS: Brajrajnagar,

Dist- Jharsuguda, Odisha,…………………..…………..……..………. Complainant.

                                           Versus 

1. Bharti Airtel Limited, (Circle Office),

Infocity Campus, 6^th Floor,

E-13/1 Chandak Industrial Estate,

Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar-751 024.

2. Bharti Airtel Limited (Head Office),

6^th floor, Tower A, Plot no. 16, Udyog Vihar,

Industrial Area, Phase-4, Gurgaon- 122 001.

3. Bharti Crescent (Regd, Office),

1, Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj,

Phase- II, New Delhi- 110 070.……………………..................... Opp. Parties.

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant                                  Sri K.C.Agrawal, Adv. & Associaters.

For the Opp. Party No.1                           Sri T.K.Harichandan, Adv. Associates.

For the Opp. Party No.2 & 3                     Self( Ex-Parte).

Date of Order: 25.01.2017

Present

                                            1. Shri S.L.Behera, President.

                                            2. Shri S.K. Ojha, Member.

Sri S.K.OJha, Member: - In brief, fact of the complainant’s case is that, he is a postpaid mobile subscriber of the O.Ps. (Bharti Airtel Limited) having mobile No. 9337789614.  The complainant had to go on tour to abroad ( Kazakstan)  for which the complainant contacted with the O.Ps. for availing services for hassle free and clear talk time from Kazakstan to anywhere in India for international roaming

package. The O.Ps. advised to purchase one international roaming package of Rs.999/- only online.  The complainant purchased the same online on dtd. 02.08.2016 which was activated on the same day having validity of 30 days.  The complainant started journey to Kazakstan on dtd. 04.08.2016 and stayed upto dtd.08.08.2016.  During his visit the SIM card of the said number did not function during his visit.  The complainant tried to talk with his family members, businessman and friends in India through associated network operators like KCell, Kar Tel and Tele2 as mentioned on their website and also tried by switching off the hand set and switching it on but failed to talk to anyone.  After returning to India on dtd. 09.08.2016 the complainant lodged complaint to the O.Ps. (customer care) over phone but the O.Ps. did not reply and turned a deaf ear to the complaint of complainant.  Being harassed and tortured mentally the complainant alleged unfair trade practice and deficiency in service against the O.Ps. and filed this case with supporting documents.

Being noticed through this Forum, the O.P.No1. appeared and filed written version where the O.P.No.2 and 3 kept silent  in this case and stand ex-parte after being providing sufficient opportunities. O.P.No.1 after filing of his version failed to attend the hearing proceeding after providing opportunities.  The O.P.No.1 submitted through his written version that the complainant knowingly not disclosed the activation procedure which he was adopted after reaching at Kazakstan.  The complainant could not exercise the options to start the service from his hand set.  Basing on the above the O.P.No.1 prayed for dismissal of the case.

Heard from the complainant and gone through the materials available.  The complainant has filed the printouts of various Tariff plans in connection to international roaming service, postpaid account summary dtd.09.08.2016.  Out of various international roaming services plan the complainant on good faith chosen a plan of Rs.999/- for Kazakstan where he could get 30 min free incoming. Incoming @ Rs.19m, Outgoing @ Rs.39/m, Data @ Rs.39/MB, SMS @ Rs.15. val: 30 day. As per the postpaid account summary dtd. 09.08.2016 the complainant has made calls upto 04.08.2016  and there is no any entry of any voice call  to any operator or to any number from dtd. 05.08.2016 to dtd. 08.08.2016. It clearly reveals that the complainant could not make any call from dtd.05.08.2016 to dtd.08.08.2016 during his tour to Kazakstan country for which he adopted international roaming service plan from the O.Ps.

The complainant being a businessman had taken international roaming service plan for his personal use i.e. to make voice calls to his family members, friends so also his to his clients but unfortunately he was unable to avail any such service and have harassed both physically and mentally there outside the country like Kazakstan. The O.Ps. had taken Rs.999/- from the complainant to provide international roaming service for Kazakstan country but failed to provide any such service to the complainant from dt.05.08.2016 to dtd.08.08.2016 which clearly denotes towards deficiency in service so also commitment of unfair trade practice by the O.Ps.

On the above facts and circumstances, the complaint petition is hereby allowed with directions to the O.Ps. in the form of order as follows:-

ORDER

1. The O.Ps are hereby jointly and severally directed to return Rs.999/- (Rupees nine hundred ninety nine) only to the complainant which received towards international roaming service charge.

2. The O.Ps. are hereby jointly and severally further directed to pay a sum of Rs.60,000/- (Rupees sixty thousand) only to the complainant towards mental agony, harassment including litigation costs.

Accordingly the case is disposed of.

Order pronounced in the open court today on this the 25^th day of January, 2016, copy of this order shall be communicated to the parties as per Rule.

                                                                I Agree,                                                                                                        

                                                        S. L. Behera President                    S.K.Ojha, Member               

                                                                        Dictated and corrected by me

                                          S.K.Ojha, Member.