The complainant has filed this case u/s. 12 of Consumer Protection Act with a prayer to direct the O.Ps to refund the security deposit amounting to Rs.2, 000/- plus interest thereon till full realization and also to direct the O.Ps to compensate the complainant for mental agony and harassment amounting to Rs.50, 000/- and also to direct the O.Ps to pay Rs.10, 000/- towards litigation cost i.e totaling Rs. 62, 000/-.
The case of the complainant, in a nutshell, is that the complainant is a practicing Advocate at Alipurduar Court. One telephone connection being No. 03564-253041 (Land Line) was installed by O.Ps in the residence of complainant. For the purpose of said installation, the complainant had deposited security money amounting to Rs.2, 000/- in cash for which a Registration Card/for new telephone connection was issued being Registration No.ALD/GS/2003/0121 dated 19/03/2003, Serial No. 024322, customer No. 0356- 400001 (Annexure- A and A/1 ).
The complainant after installation of said telephone,has been paying the telephone bill which he received from time to time to the O.Ps including the rent of the said telephone and lastly the complainant paid the bill on 08/08/14 (Annexure-B). Since the installation of the said telephone connection, its services were mostly unsatisfactory and that’s why, the complainant being disgusted surrendered the said telephone on 06/06/14. The complainant used to lodge complaint frequently for improving the performance of service of telephone but no effect. The Photocopy of surrender receipt is Annexure-C.
Thereafter, the complainant on several occasions asked the O.Ps to refund the security money but O.Ps are reluctant to refund it. Finding no other alternative the complainant issued a legal notice on 03/09/15 which was duly served upon O.P.No.3 on 04/09/15. The Photocopy of legal notice and the postal receipt and A/D are Annexure-D, D/1 and D/2. Besides issuing the legal notice, the complainant on several times attended the Office of O.Ps for realization of said security money. But the staff of O.Ps mis-behaved with the complainant and as a result, the complainant lost his prestige and reputation and he sustained mental agony. The activities of O.Ps are whimsical, arbitrary and against the principles of fare business. As such the O.Ps are liable to compensate the complainant along with refund of security deposit as prayed for.
The O.P No.1 and 3 have appeared and jointly filed W/V and contested the case denying the allegations, contending, inter alia, that the case is not maintainable and the complainant has no locus- standi to file the instant complaint as no cause of action has been made out in this case. The case is also barred by C. P. Act. According to O.Ps, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. The complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. BSNL being an incorporated Public Company is a necessary party. The complainant wrongly arrayed the name of General Manager, Telecom, BSNL as O.P.No.2. Practically according to O.Ps there is no such designation in the Telecom District Jalpaiguri. Admittedly, a telephone connection was installed in the house of complainant (Land line) and an amount of Rs.2, 000/- was deposited in the nature of Registration Fee but not as security deposit.
The O.Ps did not receive any official complaint with regard to misbehavior of staff etc. in connection with the complainant’s grievance as alleged. But it is a fact that the complainant had surrendered his telephone on 06/06/14. According to O.Ps, the amount of Rs.2, 000/- was deposited by complainant being registration fee. Out of initial registration fee Rs.2, 000/- an amount of Rs.120/- had been deducted as monthly rent but it was not actually deducted as the complainant paid telephone bill only Rs.560/- had been deducted as an installation charge including service tax at the rate of Rs.10.2 % p. a. The O.Ps tried their level best to redress the complaints which is being registered by its consumers. No written complaint has been filed by the complainant in order to show the misbehavior as alleged herein.
As a result, the O.Ps have prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost.
The complainant have filed some documents to substantiate the case which are being Annexure-A, A/1, B, C, D and D/1, D/2 and D/3.
On the contrary the O.Ps did not file any documents.
The complainant and the O.Ps have filed evidence on affidavit. On perusal, it appears to us, that those are nothing but re-iterated version of complaint and W/V. Written arguments have been filed by both parties.
It is pertinent to mention here that during pendency of this case, the O.Ps have filed an A/C payee cheque being No.158062 of Union Bank of India, Canning Street, Kolkata dated 18/05/17 amounting to Rs. 1, 440/- infavour of complainant viz. Sanchay Ghosh and the same was deposited before this Forum (vide order dated 25/05/17) but the complainant did not receive it. Ld. Agent appear on behalf of O.Ps argued that as the connection was rental and the complainant had paid the first telephone bill so only Rs. 560/- was deducted out of Rs. 2, 000/- as per rules.
It is also pertinent to mention here that in view of the prayer of the complainant, the name of O.P.No.2 has been deleted because the O.Ps have referred in their W/V that no such post exists at present ( vide order dated03/05/17 ).
In this context, the following points were necessarily come up for consideration to reach a just decision of the case.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Is the complainant a consumer u/s.2 (1)(d)(ii) of Consumer Protection Act ?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the instant case?
- Have the O.Ps any deficiency in service as alleged by the complainant?
- Is the complainant entitled to get any relief/reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
We have gone through the record very carefully. Perused the entire photocopy of the documents which filed by complainant. Heard the arguments of both sides.
Point No.1 and 2-
It appears from the record that admittedly a telephone (Land Line) was installed in the house of complainant. Whatever it may be the reason, the complainant surrendered his telephone which was being No. 03564-253041 on 06/06/14. On observing the photo copy of document filed by complainant i.e Registration Card/for new telephone connection (Annexure-A/1) an amount of Rs.2, 000/- was deposited by complainant under telephone scheme being registration No. ALD/GS/2003/0121 dated 19/03/2003, REGN CATEGORY- GS- (NON-OYT (SPL), Customer NO. 0356400001.
The cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. The Office of O.Ps i.e O.P.No.3 is situated within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. The complainant has claimed in this case totaling Rs.62, 000/- which is far less than the pecuniary jurisdiction of this District Forum.
Therefore, having heard the Ld. Agents of both sides and on considering the materials on record, we are in view, that the complainant is a consumer under the C. P. Act and the Forum has sufficient jurisdiction i.e pecuniary and territorial to entertain the complaint.
As such, both the points are decided in favour of the complainant.
Point No.3 and 4-
Both the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity.
Undisputedly a telephone connection was installed at the residential premises of the complainant and for that purpose the complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.2,000/- at B.S.N.L, Jalpaiguri Telecom District, West Bengal, Telephone. Admittedly, the complainant surrendered the telephone being No.03564-253041 on 06/06/14 (Annexure-C) and last bill of said telephone paid on 08/08/14 amounting to Rs.31/- only (Annexure-B).
Now, a dispute has been cropped up between the parties regarding the deposit of the said amount of Rs.2, 000/- whether it was a security deposit or it was a registration fee. Though the complainant alleged that he asked the O.Ps to refund the security deposit on several times and the O.Ps are reluctant to refund the amount. But, on close scrutiny of the record, no such documents have been filed by the complainant to show that in writing he demanded to refund the security deposit. It reveals that the complainant sent a legal notice on 03/09/15 which was duly served upon the O.P No.3 on 04/09/15. On scrutiny of Annexure-A and A/1 it appears that the said amount of money was deposited by the complainant for connection under Telephone Scheme (NON-OYT (SPL) on 19/03/03 and the complainant’s name was registered for new telephone connection being registration No. ALD/GS/2003/0121 dated 19/03/03, REGN. CATEGORY GS (NON- OYT (SPL) and customer No. 0356400001. As the O.Ps have not made any arrangement for return of the said amount of money to the complainant, the complainant has filed this case for appropriate relief.
We have already mentioned that the O.Ps during the pendency of this case an A/C payee cheque being No.158062 dated 18/05/17 of Union Bank of India, Canning Street, Kolkata amounting to Rs. 1,440/- has been deposited before this Forum (vide order dated 25/05/17). The O.Ps have deducted an installation charge including Service Tax at the rate of 10.2% and an amount of Rs. 120/- as monthly rent. As there is no dues of monthly rent, so in this case only Rs. 560/- was deducted out of said Rs. 2,000/-. It is pertinent to mention here that up to the stage of argument of the case, the complainant did not receive it. Annexure-A clearly shows that the said amount of money was deposited by complainant and O.Ps have received it for connection under telephone scheme being charge of installation.
Whatever it may be, it is true that O.Ps had liability to refund the said deposit within a period of 60 days which has been clearly indicated in each of their telephone bills in the caption B.S.N.L Land Line service of Jalpaiguri Telecom District. In Serial D, therein the refund of security deposit for providing telephone service to be made, within (60) sixty days of closure of telephone connection, otherwise eligible for interest @ 10%. The said matter supports the booklet of Consumer Affairs Department, West Bengal. It is not understandable to us why the O.Ps did not refund the said deposit to the complainant within the aforesaid period. It clearly show that even after receiving of the legal notice, the O.Ps did not make any payment for refund of the said money to the complainant. The O.Ps have assigned no reason why they did not make any endeavor to refund the money. It is not understandable to us what circumstances compelled the O.Ps to deposit the cheque being an amount of Rs.1, 440/- dated 18/05/17. Since the surrender of telephone on 06/06/14 practically more than (3) three years have been elapsed up to the date of passing final order.
Though the complainant has alleged that the staff of O.Ps misbehaved with him and as a result he lost his prestige and reputation but nothing has been proved by cogent evidence. So, we do not like to make any comments on this point.
The complainant in support of his case referred some case laws of Hon’ble Appellate Courts viz. Vol-II (2004) CPJ 437 (Delhi State Commission), Vol-I (2004) CPJ 199 ( Punjab State Commission, Chandigarh) and Vol-III( 2004) CPJ 19 (Rajasthan State Commission).
Perused the above said case laws. Hon’ble Appellate Court concluded all the cases deficiency in service. In Vol-II 2004 CPJ 437 Hon’ble St.Commission has been pleased to pass an order of compensation due to delay in shifting Telephone. In another case laws i.e Vol-I (2004) CPJ 199 Hon’ble St.Commission held that security deposit by the complainant not refunded, it is deficiency in service and O.P is liable to refund the security deposit with interest @ 18% per annum. In other case law i.e Vol-III (2004) CPJ 19 (Rajasthan St.Com.) the Hon’ble St. Commission observed deficiency in service in that case as well as the Respondent was directed to refund the sum to the Appellant with interest and also further directed to pay compensation for mental agony.
The facts of the above said case laws are different, not in consonance with the facts and circumstances of the present case. Definitely there is deficiency in service in this case.
However, on considering all aspects we are of opinion that the complainant has been able to prove his case.
As such, having heard Ld. Agents of both-sides and on considering the materials on record, we think that O.Ps cannot deny their deficiency in service and negligence in this case. We are of opinion that the complainant is entitled to get/refund the said deposit after deducting the charges for installation of telephone as well as service tax etc which has been already deducted. The cheque which has been filed amounting to Rs. 1, 440/-. be received by the complainant.
Besides above the complainant is entitled to get an interest @ 18% per annum in respect of deposit amount i.e Rs. 2, 000/- since the date of surrender of telephone on 06/06/14 up to the date of the passing of final order.
As the complainant is no longer customer of O.Ps, so we do not like to impose any further amount of compensation being mental agony and harassment.
The above interest as awarded by this Forum includes the amount for mental agony and harassment.
Thus, the points are decided against the O.Ps.
In the result, the case succeeds in part.
Hence, it is,
ORDERED
that the C.C No.18 of 2016 be and the same is allowed on contest in part against the O.P. No. 1 and 3 with cost of Rs. 2, 000/- which is to be paid by O.Ps to the complainant.
The O.Ps are directed to pay Jointly and/or severally the interest @ 18% per annum to the complainant in respect of deposit amount of Rs. 2, 000/- w.e.f. the date of surrender of telephone till the final order passed to-day.
The complainant is directed to receive the cheque which has already deposited by the O.Ps in this case being Cheque No. 158062 dated 18/05/17 amounting to Rs.,1,440/- within (7) seven days. The complainant is entitled to receive the interest as above and cost of litigation.
If the said O.Ps. disobey the present Forum’s order, in that case the O.Ps shall have to pay the penalty of Rs. 100/- for each days delay which shall be deposited to the State Consumer Welfare Fund., West Bengal.
Let a plain copy of this Final Order be supplied to the concerned parties by hand/be sent under registered post with A/D forthwith for information and necessary action.
Dictated & Corrected by me
