Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/339/2020

Ankit Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bharti Airtel Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Inperson

25 Mar 2021

ORDER

CC No.339 of 2020.

Ankit vs. Bharti Airtel.

 

Present:    None for complainant.

                 Sh.Ramneek Sharma, Adv. for respondent.

                               

               This complaint has been called several times since morning, but the complainant failed to appear before this Commission, either in person or through any Advocate up to 2.45PM. Further wait is unjustified.  No notice is required to the complainant, he himself instituted the complaint on 4.1.2021 during the covid-19 period. On the another hand, Shri Ramneek Sharma, Adv. for respondent suffered statement on behalf of respondents, according to which the respondents are ready to refund Rs.5734/- to the complainant within the period of one month subject to return of wifi broadband by the complainant to the respondent.

            Non appearance on behalf of complainant shows, he is no more willing to prosecute the present complaint and suffering of statement by the counsel for respondents makes its clear, the respondents have not committed any act of negligence and deficiency in service.

            Considering the totality of facts and material on record without commenting anything adverse comment on the part of the respondent, the complaint is partly accepted.  The respondent is held liable to refund Rs.5734/- to the complainant within the period of 30 days from the date of order, subject to return of wifi broadband set to the respondent against proper receipt.  No order as to costs. File be consigned to the records.

                       

                                                                  President,

                                                                DCDRF, YNR,

                                                        Distt & Sessions Judge (VRS)

         Member                                             25.3.2021.