General Manager,Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited V/S Sanjay Kumar Mohapatra
Sanjay Kumar Mohapatra filed a consumer case on 17 Jan 2017 against General Manager,Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited in the Cuttak Consumer Court. The case no is CC/51/2015 and the judgment uploaded on 14 Sep 2017.
Orissa
Cuttak
CC/51/2015
Sanjay Kumar Mohapatra - Complainant(s)
Versus
General Manager,Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited - Opp.Party(s)
G S MOhanty
17 Jan 2017
ORDER
IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK.
For the complainant : Sri Girija Sankar Mohanty,Adv. & Associates.
For the Opp.Party. : Sri S.K.Nayhak,S.K.Nayak,Sub-Divisional Engineer(Legal)
O/O:GMTD,BSNL,Cuttack.
Sri Bichitra Nanda Tripathy,Member.
The complaint is against the O.Ps for deficiency in service and also for unfair trade practice.
In nutshell the complaint is as follows:-
The complainant is having a cell phone with BSNl line. A sum of Rs.11/- was the balance in his Cell Pone (No.8763764689) on 5.4.2015. He recharged for another Rs.60/- at about 10.35 A.M of the same day. In spite of his normal use of the said Cell phone suddenly on 6.4.2015 at about 12 noon found that the balance amount in his Cell phone has become zero.
He lodged a complaint with BSNL vide complaint No.1D07413486 on 7.4.2015 but did not get any satisfactory reply. The complainant again lodged a complaint with BSNL authorities but it yielded no result.
Finding no other way, the complainant has taken shelter of this Forum. He has prayed for reimbursement of Rs.60/-(which was recharged by the complainant) and Rs.1000/- as loss in due course &Rs.3000/- towards mental torture along with cost of litigation.
The O.P vide their letter dt.28.10.2015 has intimated that the complainant had Rs.11/- balance in his mobile No.8763764689 as on 5.4.2015. He recharged a sum of Rs.60/- on the same day and had made 12 nos. of calls to different mobile Nos. on 5.4.15 & 6.4.15 and has talked for total 4013 seconds which cost around Rs.71/- for which the balance became zero as on 6.4.15 at about 12 noon. From the details of call records as submitted by O.P. vide Annex-A it is also seen that from Telephone No. 8763764689 12 nos. of calls were made to different telephone nos. on 5.4.15 & 6.4.15 with a total duration of 4013 seconds excluding the calls made to 1503 9BSNL service provider).
This Forum has directed the O.P on 21.9.20-16 to produce the details of incoming calls of the said phone numbers as reflected for outgoing calls vide Annexure-A from sl., no.1 to 12. However, the O.Ps vide their reply dt.8.12.2016 intimated that since the incoming calls relate to 5.4.2016 and 6.4.2016 & are beyond one year neither CDR nor usage detail is available in the system. They have also furnished required BSNL guidelines to this effect which indicates that such details can be provided on payment basis within a period of six months. Such records shall be archived for at least one year for scrutiny by the Licensor for security reason and may be destroyed thereafter unless directed otherwise by the LICENSOR.
In the present case since it is delayed by more than one year, the list regarding details of incoming calls are not available.
We have gone through the case in details, perused minutely the documents/papers etc. as submitted by the complainant and as well by the O.P, heard the learned advocates/representative of BSNL and have observed as follows:-
Total balance in the telephone No. 8763764689 of the complainant was Rs.71.21p after recharge of Rs.60/- on 5.4.2005.
A no. of calls were made on 5.4.16 and 6.4.16 for which the balance has become zero. Two of such calls were for 1800 seconds and for 940 seconds for which Rs.32.40p and Rs.16.82 are charged for the purpose.
The calls made to 1503(call centre of BSNL) are not charged.
The followings are also observed from the statement submitted vide Annexure-A regarding details of calls made from telephone No. 8763764689 that on 6.4.15 the complainant made call to No.9438573175 at 9.10.16 and the call was for 1800 seconds i.e. for 30 minutes. As such this call ended at 9.40.46 and the complainant made again another call at 9.40.46 to the same number for 940 seconds. Two calls to the same number without giving a gap of one second of time although appears absurd but may not be impossible since there is possibility of dialing the same number again by the complainant without giving any gap in between.
But the complainant made a call to 1503(service centre of BSNL) on 6.4.15 at 20.35.33 for 63 seconds, which indicates that the said call was ended at 20.36.36 but the 2nd call to same number i.e. 1503 was made by the complainant at 20.36.01 for 34 seconds which not only appears absurd but also appears impossible. How a second call to the same number can be allowed before the 1st call is completed? How 2 calls can be made at same time to a same number from one Cell Number?
This indicates that the recordings made by BSNL vide Annexure-A is absurd and not correct.
Basing on the facts and circumstances as stated above, we have observed that Annexure-1 submitted by BSNL is defective and not a proper record relating to the calls made by the complainant. Hence to meet the ends of justice, we allow the case against the O.P.
ORDER
O.P. will refund a sum of Rs.60/- as recharged by the complainant and will also pay a sum of Rs.500/- towards mental torture as compensation to the complainant. No further order towards cost of litigation.
The above payment shall be made to the complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to take shelter of this Hon’ble Forum as per C.P.Act,1986.
Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble Member in the Open Court on this the 17th day of January, 2017 under the seal and signature of this Forum.
(Sri B.N.Tripathy )
Member.
( Sri D.C.Barik )
President.
(Smt. Sarmistha Nath)
Member(W).
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.