Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/149/2020

Mansur Ali - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bharti Airtel Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Mohd. Waseem

24 Aug 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/149/2020
Date of Institution	:	18/03/2020
Date of Decision	:	24/08/2022

 

Mansur Ali S/o Mahboob Ahmed, R/o House No.648, Keshoram Complex, Sector 45, Burail, Chandigarh.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

1. Bharti Airtel Limited, Regional Head Office, Plot No.21, Rajiv Gandhi, IT Park Road, Chandigarh.
2. Airtel Head Office, Sardar Patel Road, Indian Airlines Colony, Patigadda, Begumpet, Hyderabad, Telangana.
3. Airtel Store, Site No.95, Sector 46-C, Chandigarh.

… Opposite Parties

CORAM :	SURJEET KAUR	PRESIDING MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                

ARGUED BY	:	Sh.Mohd.Waseem, Counsel for Complainant.
	:	Sh.Rajat Pabbi, Vice Cousnel for Sh.Sanjiv Pabbi, Counsel for OPs.

 

Per Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member

1.      Briefly stated the allegations are that the complainant is using the mobile phone network services of OPs-Company i.e., Airtel on his mobile Phone, and complainant is doing all his business activities through this mobile number and this number is also registered on food delivering sites like Zomato. As per the complainant, the Airtel-Company suddenly stopped the SIM network services of the complainant on dated 13.03.2020 without giving any intimation to the complainant. On 16.03.2020 complainant visited the Airtel store and enquired about his complaint and reason for stopping the network services and they told the complainant that they don’t know the reason of stopping of services and they sent the mail to the company regarding this and your phone will be activated in 24 hours, but all in vain. The complainant visited many a times to the service stores of respondents but no satisfactory reply given to him. Alleging that the aforesaid act amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs, complainant filed the instant complaint.
2.     OPs contested the consumer complaint. In the present case, it is submitted that the complainant has got the number ported out from the Airtel Company and the number has been ported out to JIO Network on 13.03.2020.  The number was deactivated and was ported out in favour of JIO Network. The complete procedure was adopted and the number was ported out. Denying all the material allegations of the complainant and pleading that there has been no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. 
3.     Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated.
4.     Parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
5.     We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case. After perusal of record, our findings are as under:-
6.     The main grievance of the complainant is that his number on the Airtel network stopped function all of a sudden on 13.03.2020, and it was not made functional inspite of repeated complaints because of which he suffered a heavy business loss of Rs.2,00,000/-.
7.     The stand of OPs are that the complainant himself had made a porting request from Airtel to Jio network and accordingly it was ported out to Jio on 13.03.2020 and was deactivated from Airtel network. The complainant stand is that OPs did not follow any process or procedure due to which the heavy loss is suffered by the complainant. During arguments the OPs stand is that the message was sent before porting & deactivation and it was complainant, thereafter that he should have contacted the JIO network.
8.     We are of the concerted view that it is the complainant himself who made a request for porting of his number from Airtel to Jio network, and the complainant have not adduced any records with regard as to what procedure was required to be followed by the OPs with regard to porting out of his number from Airtel to Jio.
9.     In view of the aforesaid discussion and the reasons recorded hereinbefore, we do not find any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Accordingly, the consumer complaint, being meritless, is hereby dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
10.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-
24/08/2022	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[Surjeet Kaur]
Ls	Member	Presiding Member