PER HON’BLE PRESIDENT SHRI. PRADEEP  G. KADU

                        This is a complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 the briefly stated facts of the case and contentions of the complainant are  as follows:

1)                     The Complainant herein Mr.Vikas Mishra submitted that he purchased Excitel's internet service on December 24, 2023 and paid Rs.6,000/- for one year subscription.  From January 6, 2024, he started facing internet disconnectivity issues.

2)                     To get this resolved, he continuously raised the issue with the Opposite Party over the phone and registered his complaint.  Despite raising multiple tickets, assurances of resolution proved false, leading to prolonged inconvenience and delays in both personal and professional commitments of the Complainant.  There was no proper resolution for internet issue even after multiple escalations.

3)                     As not satisfied with the services, the Complainant decided to file a formal complaint before this Commission against Excitel Broadband Services, regarding the persistent issues he has faced with their services and support, which have resulted in significant inconvenience, mental harassment and financial loss.

Contentions of the Opposite Party

4)                     Looking to the facts of the matter, the case was admitted on 05/03/2024. Notice was issued to the Opposite Party which were duly served on the Opposite Party on 19/08/2022.  In spite of notice was served appropriately, no one on behalf of the Opposite Party remained present to represent the matter before this Commission.  Hence, in the interest of justice, on 01/07/2024 orders passed to continue proceeding exparte against the Opposite Party.

Observations of the Facts and Conclusions

5)                     The Complainant Shri Vikas Mishra appeared before this Commission to represent his matter.  He filed transaction invoice, correspondence with Opposite Party for complaint, bank statement and various e-mail communications related to the correspondence with the Opposite Party.  We have perused all the records available.  The Complainant has filed pursis that his complaint and the documents annexed thereto be treated as his Affidavit of Evidence, Written Argument as well as Oral Argument.  On the basis of documents submitted before us, we have made following observations.

i) The Complainant purchased internet broadband services from Excitel Broadband Pvt Ltd at Rs.6,000/- on dt.24/12/2023.

ii) The Complainant has raised his first complaint on 08/01/2024 for No connectivity issue vide Tkt No.211384.  The Opposite Party responded to the said complaint.  However, it seems that the Complainant not satisfied with the response.  Hence, the Complainant raised his complaint on 09/01/2024 vide Tkt.No.211391 and on 14/01/2024.

iii) The history of communication on Tky No.211844 shows that on 24/01/2024 that the fault of router is noticed by the Opposite Party and it has been addressed and changed on the same day.  The Opposite Party informed the Complainant on 24/01/2024 at 18.14 hrs that ….we have checked in our system. Internet connection is showing Active and hope you can use all the services….

iv) On 22/01/2024, the Opposite Party on NCH portal replied that the issue raised by consumer is under process and will be resolved.

v) Accordingly, the Opposite Party during resolving the issue changed router and confirmed that the connectivity is restored.  As the Complainant suffered with no connectivity, the Opposite Party increased the service period of the Complainant by 15 days.

vi) To support the allegations, the Complainant produced the whatsapp chat records in which he raised the issue of no connectivity.  The Chat records shows that the Complainant and the Opposite Party were under discussion for the no connectivity error and were finding the solution on the said issue from 08/01/2024 to 24/01/2024.  As the Complainant not satisfied with the services and resolutions provided by th3e Opposite Party, he demanded the money paid for the services refund back on 24/01/2024.  The Opposite Party conveyed that this being prepaid services, the refund would not be possible.

vii) We have perused the invoice submitted by the Complainant.  It doesn’t mentions the terms and conditions of supply and also not specify what is agreed between the two parties.  There is no other document produced by the Complainant on record which will help us to ascertain whether the service supply provided is refundable and what are the terms and conditions of the said transactions which if violated can be treated as deficiency in service.

viii) The burden of proof lies on the Complainant to ascertain the deficiency of service in a particular case.  We found that in the impugned case the Complainant states that there is an issue of no connectivity from the service provider.  The said issue was responded by the Opposite Party as under :-

                        a) Registered the complaint and deployed men to check default;

                        b) Replaced the router;

c) Confirmed on whatsapp chat on dt.24/01/2024 at 18.14 hrs that the services are now in active and live status;

d) The Opposite Party extended the service period by 15 days of the Complainant assuming the Complainant not able to use the services for 15 days;

e) The Opposite Party further agreed to support if there is any problem in network.

6)                     It is observed from the record that the Complainant has not reacted on this resolutions.  It was expected from the Complainant whether the solution provided by the Opposite Party was workable and services are restored as usual.  Instead, the Complainant demanded refund of payment made for the services to which the Opposite Party denied.

7)                       As far as Internet service is concerned one must need to understand that it is a two way process.  Further lot of technical as well as on ground issues can affect the internet services.  To get the appropriate service of internet there is a dependency on various factors from the side of internet service provider as well as internet service receiver. ….Few of these are for eg., as follows :-

a)   your internet connection can fail due to simple issues like a loose or unplugged network cable, modem, or router;

b) hardware and software components of a router or modem are prone to causing issues;

c) Strict firewall rules or security policies could be the source of your connectivity issues; For example, many new generation antivirus solutions like Norton and Threat Down actually include network intrusion protection that acts as a software firewall in filtering and blocking malicious traffic;

d) When you install two software firewalls on the same computer, such as Windows Firewall and a private, third-party firewall, the contention between the two can incorrectly block traffic.  If you recently installed or upgraded a firewall on your computer, consider disabling it temporarily to determine if it’s the cause of the connection issue;

e) If you’re on a Wi-Fi network, the connection performance can vary depending on the distance between your wireless access point and your device.  The further away you move from the Wi-Fi router or a wireless access point, the more sluggish the internet connection will be, and any further drift will result in a total breakdown.  Signal interference in your location can also limit the effective range of the Wi-Fi connection;

f) The settings on your Wi-Fi adapter can also sometimes lead to connectivity issues;

g) Failures in the operating system software controlling the adapter can frequently occur;

h) Sometimes, internet service providers or cellular internet carriers in densely populated urban areas are unable to support network traffic peaks that cause sporadic downtimes for some users.

8)                     The Complainant in the said case claimed to be dependent on the internet services for his day to day work.  Hence, it was necessary from his side to exactly identify the nature of defect in the so called services and bring the technical facts on record.  We are not inclined to agree that merely whatsapp communication in the impugned case is sufficient to hold the Opposite Party guilty for the failure in no connectivity issue in the said case.

9)                     Hence, in absence of sufficient evidence to prove the charge of deficiency of service on the Opposite Party, it would be unjustifiable to hold the Opposite Party guilty for the same.  Considering the facts mentioned in the said case and on perusal of documents available on record the present complaint deserves to be dismissed for want of sufficient evidence.  Hence the following order.

FINAL ORDER

1) The Consumer Complaint No.CC/31/2024 is hereby dismissed.

2) No order at cost.

3) The certified copies of this order be sent to both parties free of cost.