Brief facts of the complaint are that complainant got mobile connection bearing No. 9855522203 of Cellular Company from opposite party on 9/4/2009 and paid Rs.315/- as activation fee etc. vide receipt No.992600 dated 9/4/2009. At that time opposite party assured him that said telephone connection would be activated within four hours. He also gave copy of driving license as identity proof but the same was not activated. It is further alleged that complainant approached office of opposite party on 10/4/2009 and asked them to activate his telephone connection but one Nishu official of opposite party asked him to give one more identity proof upon which the Prop. of opposite party namely Mr. Neeraj Gupta visited the house of complainant and took voter card of complainant as second ID proof and the said connection was activated. But later on 11/4/2009 his outgoing calls in the said telephone connection were barred due to the fact of negative address report and due to this complainant suffered a lot. At the time of filling SAF form which was filled by Manisha official of the opposite party, the complainant gave other connection No. 9855022295 and it was assured by the abovesaid official that before visiting the house of the complainant they will make call to him for the verification of the address.. Thereafter complainant has been approaching office of opposite party many times to activate his abovesaid connection and also served legal notice dated 17/4/2009 though his counsel but the said notice received back with the remarks that at the given address there is no such firm in the name of the opposite party. Thus it is clear cut case of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite party against which he is entitled to the reliefs claimed.<br /> 2. Notice of the complaitn was sent to the opposite party and one Mr.Neeraj Aggarwal Prop. of opposite party Company appeared and filed written statement in which facts mentioned in the complaint have been emphatically denied.<br /> 3. In support of his version complainant has produced in evidence envelop Ex.C1 and letter Ex.C2.<br /> 4. On the other hand opposite party produced in evidence bill Ex.R1, photocopy of identity card issued by Election Commission of India Ex.R2.<br /> 5. In this case complainant appeared in person and the Proprietor of Gupta Telecom Mr.Neeraj Aggarwal also appeared in person. We have heard respective arguments of both the parties.. It is admitted that complainant got mobile connection bearing No. 9855522203 of Cellular Company from opposite party on 9/4/2009, At that time opposite party assured the complainant that his connection will be activated within four hours and complainant gave copy of his driving license as ID proof but the connection was not activated on 9/4/2009.<br /> That on 10/4/2009 complainant again approached office of opposite party and the official of the opposite party who proclaimed to be the Manager of the opposite party demanded one more ID proof from the complainant, so complainant gave his voter card as second ID proof to the opposite party and after that connection was activated.<br /> That on 11/4/2009, his outgoing calls in the said telephone connection were barred due to the fact of negative address report and due to this complainant suffered a lot. At the time of filling SAF form at the headquarter of the opposite party, the complainant gave other connection No. 9855022295 as his second cellular connection and his address can be verified from this cell phone..<br /> That from 12/4/2009, complainant has been approaching the opposite party time and again to activate the other connection but the opposite party is denying on one pretext or the other.. In this case Prop. of the opposite party argued that they have never assured complainant that his connection will be activated within four hours as Kapurthala is satellite town and all activities of cell phones are done at Ideas regional office, Jalandhar. Opposite party further claimed that driving license of the complainant was not clear and photo was not visible, so driving license was returned to the complainant and after receiving complete ID proof of complainant in the shape of voter card, connection was activated on 10/4/2009. Further case of the opposite party is that Ideas Cellular Ltd. verified the address of all new consumers through dedicated separate agency and this agency acts independently and opposite party has no role in the verification of address of the complainant and the said verifying agency found the address negative but after that complainant never co-operated with the opposite party. Opposite party claimed in its reply that remarks of the verifying agency is being attached with this letter but they have not attached any report of verifying agency with its reply and the same is not on the file.<br /> Complainant gave a legal notice to the opposite party on 17/4/2009 through his counsel at the address given on the cash memo issued by the opposite party to the complainant vide which Rs.315/- were charged as activation fee from the complainant but this legal notice was returned by the postal authorities with the report that there is no such firm in the name of opposite party at the given address in the notice. Complainant claims that this address was given to him by the opposite party himself.<br /> That after sometime, complainant received a letter thanking him for choosing connection of Ideas Cellular services. In this letter posted by Ideas Cellular it is mentioned that Ideas will provide best coverage to the complainant. The main thing is that on this letter same address is written which was given by the complainant to the opposite party at the time of purchasing this connection.<br /> We fail to understand that why opposite party failed to verify address of the complainant when second cell phone No. 9844022295 was with the opposite party and owner of the opposite party Company Mr.Neeraj Aggarwal personally visited the residence of the complainant and letter written by Ideas Cellular Co. Ltd. reached residence of the complainant with the same address which was negatived by the independent agency hired by the Ideas Cellular Ltd. to verify the addresses of new consumers. It is also very strange that why legal notice given by the complainant returned with the report of postal authorities that at the given address, there is no such firm in the name of opposite party.<br /> So in view of the above discussion, we are of the view that opposite party is not giving clean service to the public in general and their address is also not traceable to the postal authorities and they independently gave incomplete address of the complainant to the verifying agency of Ideas Cellular Ltd. . Opposite party is also issuing receipt of some other Company and they are running some other Company . So we direct the opposite party Company to immediately return to the complainant activation fee received from the complainant regarding cell phone No.9855522203 which is Rs.315/-and we further direct the opposite party to pay compensation of Rs. 1500/- for not activating his cellular phone in time alongwith Rs.500/- as cost of litigation within one month from the receipt of copy of this order. Opposite party is also directed to return voter card of the complainant within 15 days from the receipt of copy of this order.<br /> Let certified copies of order be supplied to the parties free of cost and thereafter file be consigned to record room.<br /> <br /> Announced : Shashi Narang Paramjit Singh<br /> 18.6.2009 Member President