O R D E R

Sri. P. Satheesh Chandran Nair (President):

                    The complainant filed this complaint before this Forum u/s. 12 of the C.P. Act.

                 2. The case of the complainant is stated as follows:  On 22.07.2009 the complainant installed a Broad Band connection from the opposite parties for a rent of Rs.250/- per month.  When the bill amount was growing up on 22.10.2010, the complainant has changed to a new plan known as ‘unlimited plan’.  According to him, the opposite party has not been properly providing net facilities to the complainant.  The complainant filed so many petition before the concerned regarding the defect of service of Broad Band connection.  But the opposite party has not taken any serious steps regarding his grievances.  Hence he filed this complaint before this Forum. 

                 3. The complainant filed this complaint before this Forum on 12.01.2015 along with copies of 6 documents.  This Forum issued notice to the opposite parties after perusing the complaint and record produced.  The opposite parties received the notice duly served from this Forum but this opposite parties did not turned up hence on 31.03.2015 1^st opposite party was declared exparte and 05.02.2015 the 2^nd opposite party was also declared exparte. 

                 4. On the basis of the pleadings of the complaint and the records produced in favour of the complainant, we raised the following issues for consideration.

1. Whether the complaint is maintainable?
2. If the complaint is maintainable what are the relief and cost?

        5. Point No.1 & 2:- For the sake of convenience of the case we are considering both the issues together.  On the side of the complainant, he was examined as PW1 in chief and marked Exts.A1 to A6.  Ext.A1 is the bill for an amount of Rs.759.13 dated 06.11.2014 issued from the BSNL (2^nd opposite party) in favour of the complainant.  Ext.A2 is the bill dated 06.12.2014 for an amount of Rs.797.53  issued in favour of the complainant.  Ext.A3 is the bill dated 06.01.2015 for an amount of Rs.985.87 issued in favour of the complainant. Ext.A4 is the notice issued to 2^nd opposite party by the complainant on 18.10.2014.  Ext.A5 is the notice dated 24.11.2014 to 2^nd opposite party by the complainant.  Ext.A6 is the letter dated 11.12.2014 to the Account Officer, BSNL, Pathanamthitta by the complainant.

         6. The complainant deposed before the Forum in terms of the complaint filed before this Forum.  Since the opposite parties are exparte the chief examination of the complainant is an unchallenged version before this Forum.  According to the complainant, he sustained so many damages due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  Ext.A1 to Ext.A3 shows that he is a customer of the 1^st and 2^nd opposite party in this case and Ext.A4 and Ext.A5 shows that he has issued notice to the complainant regarding the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties even prayer to the filing of this complaint.  But it is seen that the opposite parties has not even turned up to redress the grievance of the complainant.  It is also pertinent to see that as a process of law this Forum duly issued notice to the opposite parties for appearance and for reply.  It is seen that though they received the notice but not turned up before this Forum or even given a reply for that notice.  At this juncture, we have to rely the pleadings of the complainant.  Though the complainant demanded a huge amount of Rs.5 lakhs as compensation from the opposite party we feel that there is no reason or basis for this claim.  Moreover the complainant has not adduced any evidence to show that he sustained a huge amount of loss due to the deficiency in service of the opposite parties.  But on the other hand, we have to consider the grievance of the complainant legally and on the basis of natural justice.  On the available evidence adduced by the complainant in this case there is nothing to disbelieve the credibility of the complainant.  When a customer is raising any kind of defect or deficiency in service it is the paramount duty of the concerned to  hear it and redress it.  Here it is seen that the opposite parties were acted so irresponsible with a deaf ear.  Since the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties are public undertaking companies of Govt. of India their responsibilities to the public must be more acceptable.  Here, it is clear that 1^st and 2^nd opposite party has committed deficiency in service.  As a result, we find that the complainant is succeed to prove the case in a limited level.

         7. In the result, we pass the following orders:

1. The 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties are directed to provide Broad Band Net connection to the complainant without any defect within 15 days of this order.

2. The 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) as compensation to the complainant on the date of order with interest of 10% per annum.

3. A cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) is also allowed to the complainant for 1^st and 2^nd opposite party, from the date of this order with interest of 10% per annum.

         Declared in the Open Forum on this the 30^th day of April, 2015.

                                                                          (Sd/-)

                                                                 P. Satheesh Chandran Nair,                                                                                (President)

Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member – I)          :     (Sd/-)

Smt. Sheela Jacob (Member – II)             :     (Sd/-)

Appendix:

Witness examined on the side of the complainant:

PW1  :  Johnson. T. John

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:

A1 :  Bill for an amount of Rs.759.13 dated 06.11.2014

A2 :  Bill dated 06.12.2014 for an amount of Rs.797.53 

A3 :  Bill dated 06.01.2015 for an amount of Rs.985.87.

A4 :  Notice dated 18.10.2014 issued by the complainant

        to 2^nd opposite party. 

A5 :  Notice dated 24.11.2014 issued by the complainant

        to 2^nd opposite party. 

A6 :  Letter dated 11.12.2014 to the Account Officer, BSNL,  

        Pathanamthitta by the complainant.

Witness examined on the side of the complainant:  Nil.

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:  Nil.

                                                                                               (By Order)

                                                                                       (Sd/-)

                                                                    Senior Superintendent.

Copy to:- (1) Johnson T. John, Thekkekaithavana House,

                   Chellakkadu.P.O., Pin – 689 677,

                   Ranni, Pathanamthitta Dist.                                      

              (2) Dist. General Manager, BSNL, Pathanamthitta.P.O.,

           Pathanamthitta.

              (3) Asst. Engineer, BSNL, Ranni.P.O., Ranni.

              (4) The Stock File.