BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.416 of 2014

Date of Instt. 25.11.2014

Date of Decision :20.03.2015

Dr.Rajinder Singh aged about 64 years son of Jawahar Singh, Chief Administrative Officer, Gulab Devi Hospital, Gulab Devi Road, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

Hi.Tech Electricals and Communications, 41-42, Central Market, Near Narinder Cinema, Jalandhar through its Prop.Parveen Kumar Sharma.

.........Opposite party

Complaint under section 1 2 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: S. Jaspal Singh Bhatia (President)

Ms. Jyotsna Thatai (Member)

Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Sh.GS Agnihorti Adv., counsel for complainant.

Sh.Pankaj Kumar Adv with Sh.VB Mehta Adv., counsels for opposite party.

Order

J.S.Bhatia (President)

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, against the opposite party on the averments that the complainant got connection from the opposite party on 21.8.2012 and paid Rs.1300/- for the installation of the new connection for dish T.V. Receipt of Rs.1300/- for new dish connection dated 21.8.2012 having No.2701. The opposite party after receiving the fee for new connection gave the connection to the complainant. After getting the new connection the complainant became the consumer of the opposite party and started using the same. The complainant since then was paying the fee regularly. Originally the connection fee was Rs.400/- per month and later on the opposite party enhanced the charges from Rs.400/- to Rs.500/- per month. The complainant started paying connection fee Rs.500/- per month and later on the opposite party again enhanced the connection fee from Rs.500/- to Rs.620/- per month. Later on when the connection fee was enhanced upto Rs.620/- per month the opposite party asked the complainant for replacing Hi Definition Set Top Box and the fee for that was Rs.990/- which was paid by him. There was a defect and connection did not work properly since May 2014. He made complaint with the opposite party who later on informed him that Hi Definition Set Top Box is defective. The opposite party told the complainant to install new set top box after making payment for new Hi Definition Set Top Box. He told the opposite party that it is their fault and it is duty bound to install new Hi Definition Set Top Box. The complainant connection is not working properly and is lying dead since September 2014 and inspite of that the complainant made the payment to the opposite party on the assurance given by the opposite party that they will install new Hi Definition Set Top Box within few days. On such like averments, the complainant has prayed for damages and litigation expenses.

2. Upon notice, opposite party appeared and filed a written reply pleading that the complainant is using the facility without making payment of the monthly charges for the last more than three months. The complainant had been using the Hi Definition Set Top Box and the increase in the rates is only with regard to the policy of the company know as Dish T.V India Limited. The complainant opted for using the full pack of high definition and has been paying according to the uses. Rs.990/- was charged for replacing the Hi Definition Set Top Box and the said amount is the price of the said box as per policy of Dish T.V. India Ltd. It is wrong that there was a defect and the connection was not working properly since May 2014 as alleged by the complainant. The complainant only informed about the fault on 12.11.2014 and on receiving the complaint the opposite party immediately deputed its technician to look into the matter and the technician immediate visited the house of the complainant and the fault was further brought to the notice of the Dish India Ltd. However the opposite party installed a new demo high definition full pack in the house of the complainant and since then complainant is enjoying the facility without any interruption and the said box is still lying in the house of the complainant. The complainant is enjoying the facility without making any payment since 14.11.2014. The complainant is liable to pay Rs.1860/- to the opposite party. So far the replacement of the new HD box is concerned, the opposite party alongwith new HD box has been visiting the house of the complainant but the complainant was not available. The opposite party is still ready and willing to hand over the new HD box in place of the demo box and the earlier HD box being retained by the complainant. It denied other material averments of the complainant.

3. In support of his complaint, learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C26 and closed evidence.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party has tendered into evidence affidavits Ex.OP/A and Ex.OP/B alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP1 to Ex.OP3 and closed evidence.

5. We have carefully gone through the record and heard learned counsels for the parties.

6. According to the complainant, the Hi Definition Set Top Box is not working properly and is lying dead since September 2014. In the written reply opposite party has pleaded that complainant only informed about the fault on 12.11.2014 and on receiving the complaint the opposite party deputed its technician to look into the matter and brought to the notice of the Dish India Limited. So admittedly there was fault in the Hi Definition Set Top Box installed by the opposite party. In the written reply opposite party has further pleaded that opposite party alongwith new HD box visited the house of the complainant but the complainant was not available and it is still ready to hand over the new HD box in place of the demo box and the earlier HD box being retained by the complainant.

7. In view of above circumstances, the present complaint is accepted and opposite party is directed to install new Hi Definition Set Top Box free of cost. However, the complainant shall return old HD box and demo box to the opposite party. According to the opposite party, the complainant is enjoying the facility without making any payment since 14.11.2014 and is liable to pay Rs.1860/- to the opposite party. This amount be treated as compensation to the complainant meaning thereby, opposite party shall not be entitled to claim the arrear of the connection till the installation of the new Hi Definition Set Top Box by opposite party. The complainant is directed to allow the opposite party to install new Hi Definition Set Top Box whenever any its employee visit for this purpose. There shall be no order as to cost. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under the rules. File be consigned to the record room

Dated Parminder Sharma Jyotsna Thatai Jaspal Singh Bhatia

20.03.2015 Member Member President