DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No. 191 of 2017 Date of institution: 10.03.2017 Date of decision : 17.10.2017
Naveen Kumar, Shop No.2, Gandhi complex, Village Badhedi, Sector 41-D, Chandigarh.
……..Complainant
Versus
Connect Broadband Quardant Televentures Ltd. (Formerly known as HFCL Infotel Ltd.), through authorised signatory, B-71, Phase-VII, Industrial Area, Focal Point, Mohali 160055.
………. Opposite Party
Complaint under Section 12 of
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Quorum
Shri Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President
Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member
Present: Shri Manoj Kumar Rohilla, cl. For the complainant.
None for the OP.
ORDER
By Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President
Complainant Naveen Kumar has filed the present complaint against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as the OP) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:
2. The complainant had taken internet plan namely Zzip 749 4 mbps from the OP at a monthly rent of Rs.749/- vide account No.ODSLS336639. Cheque of advance payment of Rs.750/- was issued by the complainant. Shri Amrik Singh representative of the OP installed modem at the shop of the complainant on 11.08.2016 and started the internet service without calling facility as per agreement executed between the complainant and the OP. In January, Shri Amrik Singh authorized representative of the OP installed telephone handset on the line and told the complainant that the OP is providing free local and STD calling facility for 3 months without any extra charges. However, Shri Amrik Singh again visited the shop of the complainant and removed the handset by saying that handset will not be provided on the plan of the complainant and the complainant had to install his own handset. On the plan of the complainant the OP is providing only free local and STD calls and not the handset. Accordingly, the complainant installed his own handset and started using local and STD calls believing that the same is free. However, the complainant was shocked to receive bill for January to the tune of Rs.1872/- in which Rs.24/- was charged for wrong plan, Rs.724/- for calling charges and Rs.113/- wrong extra service charges. The plan of the complainant was changed without his consent and calling charges also included in the bill whereas he was assured that he need not to pay any amount. The DSL No. of the complainant was converted from ODSLS336639 to Telephone No.01725007043. The complainant contacted Shri Amrik Singh representative of the OP who assured that the complainant is getting free calls and his bill would be corrected by the OP on request. The complainant requested the OP for adjustment and correct of bill but his request was rejected on the ground that his plan was changed and there was no commitment by the OP for free calls. The complainant again contacted Amrik Singh as well as sent e-mails to the OP but all in vain. Rather the complainant was told that if he did not pay the bill, his connected will be disconnected. The OP instead of correcting the bill, disconnected the internet connection of the complainant. The complainant requested the OP to start the connection but the OP forced him to pay the bill for start of his internet connection. The official of the OP assured the complainant that if his request is found correct, he would get refund or the amount would be adjusted in next bill. On payment by the complainant, the connection was restored. The complainant thereafter contacted the OP many a times but all in vain. Then in the month of February instead of correcting his bill, the OP again sent wrong bill for Rs.1148/-. The complainant made a telephonic request to the OP for adjustment/revised/waive off the bill but apprehending disconnection of his connection, the complainant made the payment of this bill. The OP has failed to provide him the services as committed and changed the plan without his consent. Alleging negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the complainant has sought direction to the OP to refund amount of Rs.1147/- alongwith compensation of Rs.80,000/- for harassment, inconvenience and loss in income due to disconnection and Rs.10,000/- as litigation charges.
3. The OP could not file the reply within the period stipulated and as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 04.12.2015 in case titled as New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd., the right of the OP to file written statement was stuck off.
4. In order to prove the case, the counsel tendered in evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.CW-1/1 and copies of bill Ex.C-1; agreement Ex.C-2; bill Ex.C-3; e-mails Ex.C-4; receipt Ex.C-5; e-mail Ex.C-6; bill Ex.C-7 and payment receipt Ex.C-8. In rebuttal, the evidence of the OP consists of affidavit of Shri Ashwinder Singh Bhangu, Deputy Manager Legal Ex.OP-1/1 and copy of special power of attorney Ex.OP-1; migration request Ex.OP-2 and account statement Ex.OP-3.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the OP changed the internet plan of the complainant without his consent and then sent wrong bill of extra amount continuously for two months. Learned counsel has further submitted that the document Ex.OP-2 produced by the OP shows that it has changed the plan of the complainant on the request of Ms. Deepali but it has failed to prove the relation of Ms. Deepali with the complainant. It has been further argued by learned counsel that if there was no fault on the part of the OP, then the OP should not have allowed waiver of Rs.773/-. Learned counsel has thus prayed for allowing the complaint.
6. We have gone through the pleadings, evidence and written arguments of the complainant as well as heard learned counsel for the complainant. Neither anybody appeared on behalf of the OP for addressing oral arguments nor any written arguments filed on behalf of the OP. It is an admitted fact that the complainant had opted for Zzip 749 4 Mbps Plan vide agreement Ex.C-2. However, the OP without consent of the complainant has changed his plan to Zzip 749 8 Mbps and changed an amount of Rs.723.98 toward usage for call charges. The complainant has agitated this change of plan vide various e-mails Ex.C-4 (colly). The complainant was given waiver of Rs.773/- by the OP which fact proves that there was deficiency in service on the part of the OP regarding change of plan without the consent of the OP. Had the plan been changed with the consent of the complainant, there would have been no occasion for the OP to allow waiver to the complainant. Moreover, the document produced by the OP Ex.OP-2 to prove the fact that the plan was changed on the request of Ms. Deepali cannot be relied upon as the OP has failed to prove that aforesaid Ms. Deepali is an employee of the complainant or in any way related to him. Moreover, when the agreement Ex.C-2 was entered into with the complainant, the OP was to act for change of the plan, if any, on the consent of the complainant and not anybody else. All these facts prove that there is a clear cut case of deficiency in service of the OP.
7. Accordingly, in view of our aforesaid discussion, we direct the OP to refund to the complainant Rs.1,147/- (Rs. One Thousand One Hundred Forty Seven only). We also find that the complainant is entitled to a lump sum compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand only) on account of mental agony, harassment and litigation cost. The present complaint stands allowed.
The OP is further directed to comply with the order of this Forum within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the amount of compensation awarded shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of this order till realisation.
The order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced
Dated: 17.10.2017
(A.P.S.Rajput)
President
(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)
Member
