Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/949/2019

Sh. Narinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bharti Airtel - Opp.Party(s)

Ankit Gupta Adv.

22 Feb 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	949 of 2019
Date  of  Institution	:	17.09.2019
Date   of   Decision	:	22.02.2021

 

 

 

 

Sh.Narinder Singh s/o Sh.Manmohan Singh, Aged 55 years, #3357, Sector 22-D, UT, Chandigarh.

             …..Complainant

Versus

1]  Bharti Airtel, Head Office Address: Unitech World cyber Park, Sector 39, Tower A, 4^th Floor, Gurgaon 122001 Haryana through Manager.

2]  Bharti Airtel, Regional Office: Plot No.21, 2^nd Floor, Chandigarh GPO, Chandigarh 160017, Rajiv Gandhi IT Park, Kishangarh through Regional Manager.

3]  Bharti Airtel, SCO 185, sector 37-C, Chandigarh 160036 through Branch Manager.

   ….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN             PRESIDENT

         SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER 

                    SH.B.M.SHARMA                      MEMBER

 

 

Argued by :- None for complainant

  Sh.Sanjiv Pabbi, Adv. for OPs.

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

         Briefly stated, the complainant is subscriber of mobile No.9041407575 of OP Company and in August., 2018, he availed the scheme of Family Plan of Rs.799/- rental (per month) started by OPs. It is stated that in this scheme, two more number can be added as add on numbers and as such the complainant added two mobile numbers i.e. 8146941900 & 8146593900 with prime mobile No.9041407575. 

         It is stated that in June, 2019, the OP Company, without any intimation/information to the complainant, separated both the add on numbers from the Family Plan Scheme and started charging the rent of Rs.199/- per month for each connection towards monthly rent.  It is averred that for mobile connection No.8146941900 an amount of Rs.200/- & Rs.584/- has been paid and for Mobile connection No.8146593900 an amount of Rs.500/- & Rs.352/- have been paid, on 28.7.2019 & 14.8.2019 respectively i.e. in total to Rs.1636/-.  It is also stated that the OP Company also suspended the services for both the above mentioned add on numbers from 14.8.2019 to 24.8.2019 and restored the same only on 25.8.2019.  It is further stated that the complainant requested the OPs to refund the amount of Rs.1636/- charged by them illegally and also sought compensation for illegally barring the services of add on numbers for 10 days.  However, the OPs did not pay any heed.  Hence, this complaint has been filed alleging the said act & conduct of the OPs as gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

 

2]       The OPs have filed joint reply and while admitting the factual matrix of the case, stated that the OPs are bound by the Terms & Conditions of the TRAI and the complainant has been charged as per the guidelines.  It is submitted that the complainant was conveyed by mail dated 14.8.2019 for consolidation of bills & to clear the outstanding amount on add on numbers i.e. Rs.584.58/- for Mobile No.8146941900 and amount of Rs.352.28 for Mobile No.8146593900 and also an amount of Rs.973.04 on primary number. It was further conveyed to adopt the procedure as required.  It is stated that there is no question of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice, as the OPs have acted as per rules & regulations of TRAI.  Denying rest of the allegations and pleading no deficiency in service, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

3]       Rejoinder has also been filed by the complainant thereby reiterating the assertions as made in complaint and controverting that of OPs in their reply.

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the OPs and have also perused the entire record.

6]       Admittedly, the complainant availed the benefit of Family Plan Scheme, as floated by the OPs, for his prime Mobile No.9041407575, having rent plan of Rs.799/- with facility of two add on connections.  It is also not disputed by the OPs that in the month of June, 2019, the complainant was tendered the bill amounting Rs.200/- & Rs.584/- for add on connection No.8146941900 and for another add on connection No.8146593900 an amount of Rs.500/- & Rs.352/- and the same has duly been paid to the OPs by the complainant i.e. in total Rs.1636/-.

 

7]       It also goes undisputed that the services of said two add on connections remained suspended for nearly 10 days for not paying the amount charged against the add on connections.  Under the given circumstances, the complainant paid an amount of Rs.1636/-, which is the amount disputed in the present complaint, which the complainant claimed to have charged by the OPs illegally and adopting unfair trade practice on their part.  Countering the allegations, the OPs claimed that the disputed amount has been charged as per terms & conditions of TRAI and they have not indulged into any unfair trade practice nor there is any deficiency in service on their part.   

8]       Having considered all the assertions supported by duly sworn affidavit of the parties after giving thoughtful consideration to the evidence on record, it is made out that the assertions put forth by the OPs in defence are merely bald assertions which are not supported by any of the claimed terms & conditions or any rules & regulations of TRAI.  The OPs in their turn failed to specify or show any of the provisions applicable to the present case vide which the complainant has been charged for the rental charges on add on connections.  Even the OPs have not placed on record the documents pertaining to the scheme floated by the OPs in regard to the Family Plan having facility of two add on connections with prime number.  There is no clarification to the effect that whether the so called/alleged rules & regulations of TRAI are applicable in case of the complainant, who subscribed under the Family Plan scheme of the OPs in the year 2018 or the complainant is liable to pay any rental charges for the add on connections especially when he is already paying good amount of rent for the prime number.  In our considered opinion, it is only the usage charges for the add on connections, which the OPs are entitled to charge and not the rental charges for add on connections too, so has been unfairly done by the OPs in the present case.  Therefore, there is clear cut deficiency in rendering proper service on the part of the OPs as well as expose their indulgence into unfair trade practice. 

 

9]       From the above discussion and findings, the deficiency in service & unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Parties stands proved, which certainly has caused harassment to the complainant.  Therefore, the complaint stands allowed against OPs with direction to refund the complete/total rental amount, so received by them from the complainant against Mobile No.8146941900 & Mobile No.8146593900.  The OPs are also directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- as compensation to the complainant for causing harassment, along with litigation expenses of Rs.2,000/-. 

         This order shall be complied with by the Opposite Parties jointly & severally within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which they shall be liable to pay additional compensation cost of Rs.5000/- apart from above relief.

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

22^nd Feb., 2021                                                                                                                                                                        sd/-

(RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

(B.M.SHARMA)

MEMBER