Order
Complainant, a senior citizen and retired Government officer claims himself to be an old customer of Airtel because he has got installed Airtel Land Line phone bearing no. 0172-4637123 for the last about 10 years. The complainant claims to have been paying bills of this connection regularly through ECS facility availed from Syndicate Bank, Sector 17, Chandigarh account since from 2010. On 19.01.2015, one Mr. Abhinav from Airtel Company informed the complainant telephonically through mobile number 9910775789 that bank has not accepted the bill for December, 2015. Thereafter, the complainant approached the concerned bank and got information from there that same has happened due to addition of four digits in the account number as per new bank policy. Thereafter Airtel on being approached by the complainant deactivated the ECS facility instead of resubmitting the bill with new 14 digit account number. Further Airtel authorities asked the complainant to submit National Automated Clearing House (NACH) form to their office and the same was submitted by the complainant along with cancelled cheque of the bank. The bank accepted the debit for the month of February, 2016 in routine. Payment transaction of March, 2016 was reversed and on inquiry from the bank, the complainant got knowledge that Airtel has not sent the bill for clearance. When the complainant approached the Airtel, then it failed to assign the reason for such refusal. Information regarding reversal transaction was not given to the complainant. On 28.04.2016, again the complainant submitted NACH form with Airtel office at 3B2 phase at Mohali. The Service Specialist informed the complainant that NACH facility would be activated within 7 working days and the complainant will receive a message regarding this from Airtel. However, no message was received by the complainant and that is why he again took up the matter with concerned Airtel Department. The complainant was called up again to contact the Airtel Office in 3B2 phase at Mohali. On visit to that office, it was disclosed as if NACH facility has been activated and an amount of Rs. 317.74 even debited from the bank account of the complainant on 10.05.2016. The bill for April, 2016 again met with the same fate. The complainant had to go to office of Airtel for deposit of the payment of reverse bill in cash which caused him great difficulty and harassment in the age of 81 years. Request by 3B2 Mohali office of Airtel was sent to the concerned authorities number of times for updating the ECS facility for activation. Again on 31.05.2016, the complainant visited 3B2 office of Airtel in Mohali and resubmitted the NACH form coupled with cancelled cheque and those documents were acknowledged by officiala there with assurance that the complainant will not face any problem because NACH facility will be activated. As the complainant was not having faith in Airtel , so he wrote number of emails to appellate authority for confirming as to whether NACH/ECS facility has been activated or not by updating the new 14 digit account number. No satisfactory reply was received by the complainant. The complainant claims to be having good relations with bank authorities being an old customer. The bank official accepted the bills sent by the Airtel for the month of May and June, 2016, though the Airtel authorities never sent updated bill bearing 14 digit account number. The complainant deposited the bill amount for the month of July, 2016 in cash because Airtel neither updated the ECS facility and nor activated NACH despite repeated reminders and requests . As the complained problems were never redressed by the OPs and as such by pleading deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, prayer made for directing the OPs to pay claim of Rs. 50,000/- on account of compensation for mental harassment with interest @ 18% P.A. from the due date till its realization.
2. Joint reply was submitted by the OPs. It is claimed that the complainant has suppressed the material facts from this Forum and as such the complaint being false , frivolous and vexatious merits dismissal, more so when the same filed for causing damage to the reputation of the OPs. It is claimed that Airtel Company is providing best of services and the complainant is only seeking ECS facility from the bank, but without impleading bank as a party. It is also claimed that problems faced by the complainant were attended promptly and there may be error in the bank system. Allegations of deficiency in service denied one by one each.
3. Complainant to prove his case tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex CW1/1 along with documents Ex C-1 and Ex C-2 and thereafter his counsel closed the evidence.
4. On the other hand counsel for the Ops tendered in evidence affidavit Ex OP1/1 of Sh.Birender Singh Mehendroo Manager (legal) and then closed the evidence.
5. However, by way of additional evidence , the complainant tendered in evidence documents Ex C-3 and Ex C-4 and then closed the additional evidence.
6. Written arguments submitted by the complainant, but not by the Ops. Oral arguments of counsel for the parties heard and records gone through.
7. From the perusal of the file , it is made out that earlier counsel for the Ops offered to pay Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant as compensation and on acceptance of that offer, case was posted for payment vide order dated 29.11.2017 for 27.12.2017. However that compromise was not later on given pragmatic approach and as such the same itself shows that the OPs tried to redress the grievance of the complainant during the pendency of the complaint also by way of offering amount of Rs. 5,000/-. Email dated 16.01.2018 has been produced on 12.09.2018 for showing that ECS facility of the complainant has been activated and as such grievance of the complainant regarding activation of ECS facility has been redressed. Virtually through communication dated 16.01.2018 grievance is redressed through, it may not have been redressed earlier. These mitigation circumstances leans in favour of holding that Ops continued to try their best for redressal of the grievance of the complainant.
8. The case of the complainant is that despite submission of NACH form by him on 28.04.2016 as well as on 31.05.2016 and on the earlier occasion in start of 2016, the ECS mandate facility has not been activated by the OPs, despite submission of details of 14 digit account number. That ECS facility regarding the land line connection availed by the complainant from the Ops is linked with the savings account of the complainant with Syndicate Bank, Sector 17, Chandigarh is the pleaded case of the complainant. In view of this, submissions advanced by counsel for the Ops certainly has force that real fault regarding the problem of updating the ECS facility with 14 digit account number, cannot be found in the absence of the impleadment of the Syndicate Bank. It is the case of the complainant himself that the bank authorities informed him that on account of addition of four digit in his account number as per the new bank policy, requirement of resubmitting the bill with new 14 digit account number was necessitated. So requirement of updating of 14 digit account number for availing the ECS facility in question was felt because of the policy of the bank of adding four digit in earlier account number of the complainant. As the complainant has submitted the NACH form on three occasions and as such certainly some fault lay with the Ops in not updating the 14 digit account number at the earliest due to which the complainant had to send number of emails as revealed by contents of Ex C-2 containing many pages. However, reply of some of emails was sent by the Ops to the complainant and as such it is not a case of total deficiency on the part of the Ops exclusively.
9. Perusal of first page of Ex C-2 reveals that the complainant submitted request on 13.06.2016 for calling upon the OPs to update his 14 digit account number for enabling him to avail ECS facility in matter of payment of telephone bills by him through E-banking facility. Thereafter email dated 16.06.2016 was sent by the complainant, but before that reply dated 14.06.2016 was sent by the Ops to the complainant that his request for activation of NACH facility is in progress. Assurance through this email dated 14.06.2016 was given to the complainant by the Ops for resolving the issue by 21.06.2016. However, vide email dated 16.06.2016 the complainant again communicated with the Ops for claiming that despite submission of NACH form, his account number has not been corrected by the OPs. Vide email dated 24.06.2016, the complainant was informed by the OPs that his request for updating has been forwarded to the concerned department with details provided by the complainant. Assurance through this email dated 24.06.2016 was given to the complainant for updating account at the earliest. Another email dated 16.06.2016 shows as if the matter has not been resolved and that is why the complainant disclosed through this email to Ops, as if he may be constrained to knock at the door of law for the harassment caused to him. In email dated 30.06.2016, the complainant was informed that his request for ECS mandate could not be processed because STD code number is not mentioned in the email sent by him. So the complainant was advised vide email dated 30.06.2016 to submit land line number along with STD code or DSLID in the subject line. Through communication dated 08.07.2016 again the complainant was informed as if team of the Ops will validate and update the request of ECS activation at the earlier. Through another email dated 12.07.2016, the complainant was informed that he has submitted incomplete information and that is why he was called upon to disclose through email as to whether 14 digit account number of the complainant has been updated till date or not. The complainant sent bank email dated 19.07.2016 for claiming that bank letter as demanded from him is being sent.
10. Even through email dated 22.07.2016, the complainant was disclosed that he has not mentioned the concerned number for activation of ECS mandate and that is why the complainant was advised to share suitable time and alternater contact number . However, in response to that, the complainant sent email reply dated 27.07.2016 for claiming as if the Ops do not want to solve the matter in effective way. The complainant sent bank letter demanded by the Ops through email dated 19.07.2016 and thereafter email dated 08.08.2016 was sent by the complainant for claiming that duty of the Ops is to provide proper and good service to its customers. Through this correspondence dated 08.08.2016 on email, the complainant called upon the OPs to inform him, if the 14 digit account number as required for ECS and NACH has been activated or not. Copy of email dated 19.07.2016 is produced as Ex C-3, but copy of email dated 31.05.2016 (Ex C-4)sent by Assistant Manager of Syndicate Bank to the complainant shows as if the complainant has not provided 14 digit account number in his ECS mandate. Through Ex C-4 itself the complainant was disclosed that in case he does not make mention of complete 14 digit account number, then his ECS facility will not be processed. Through Ex C-4 itself the complainant was advised to get the number updated with his presenting bank biller. Later on deletion of Ex C-4 done by substituting the same with another email dated 30.05.2016 for showing as if reversal of some of the payments from his account has been done resulting in irritation to him ( complainant). So from the perusal of all this email correspondence, it is made out that the complainant himself remained at fault in not getting the 14 digit account number updated until 31.05.2016 and that is why letter in that respect was sent by the Assistant Manager of Syndicate Bank to the complainant. Till the 14 digit number of the savings bank account of the complainant feeded to Airtel, ECS mandate in that respect not bound to be activated. So virtually for suppressing the issue of letter dated 31.05.2016 by the Syndicate Bank to the complainant, the complainant has not impleaded Syndicate Bank as a party. So fault lays with the complainant in not furnishing the full information to the OPs regarding 14 digit account number or regarding other particulars referred above. Activation of ECS mandate done only on 16.01.2018 as referred above, despite the fact that the complainant had been writing to the Ops many times. As the fault lies with the OPs and also with the complainant with some extent and as such entitlement of the complainant now remains for compensation for mental agony and harassment and of litigation expenses, more so when claim through prayer clause for claiming compensation with interest made and more so when the ECS facility now has been activated w.e.f 16.01.2018. This compensation for mental agony and harassment allowed because in the absence of ECS mandate , the complainant has to visit Airtel office for paying the bills despite the fact that he communicated with the OPs for long. The mitigation circumstances referred above goads us to allow reasonable amount of compensation for mental harassment and agony. As the ECS facility now has been activated as disclosed by email dated 16.01.2018 and as such the Ops will not deactivate the same in future without notice to the complainant .
11. As a sequel of the above discussion, complaint allowed with direction to the OPs to pay Rs. 15,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation costs to the complainant. Payment of these amounts of compensation and litigation cost be made within 30 days from receipt of certified copy of order. Certified copies of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.
Announced
12.10.2018
(G.K. Dhir)
President
(Ms.Natasha Chopra)
Member
Note:
Address of OP No. 1 was corrected on 11/01/2017 and the same is as under:
“Branch Head, Plot no 21, IT Park, Airtel Manimajra, UT Chandigarh”
So, address of OP No. 1 stands corrected accordingly in the main order.
(G.K. Dhir)
President 05/12/2018
(Ms Natasha Chopra)
Member
