BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

C.C. No. 264/2011 Filed on 17.08.2011

Dated : 15.12.2011

Complainant :

Pradeep Kumar Purushothaman Reghupathy, Laura Martin Molina, P.R. Sadanam, Sree Narayanapuram, Kottukal P.O, Balaramapuram- 695 501.

(Party in person)

Opposite parties :

1. Idea Cellular Limited, Mercy Estate, 2^nd Floor, Ravipuram, M.G. Road, Cochin-682 015.

    

2. Idea Point G & M Enterprises, Opp: IOC Petrol Pump, Neyyattinkara.

    

3. My Idea, Nambaliyan Building, Balaramapuram.

This O.P having been heard on 13.12.2011, the Forum on 15.12.2011 delivered the following :

ORDER

SMT. S.K. SREELA, MEMBER

The facts of the case are as follows: Complainant had approached the 3^rd opposite party on 15.06.2011 for obtaining a prepaid internet connection and since there was some technical difficulty in offering the same, the complainant was assured that the same would be available within a period of one month and on that assurance the complainant was given post paid connection. After a period of one month, i.e; on 15.07.2011 complainant cancelled the said connection by paying the post paid amount of Rs. 170/-. But company is still demanding for further amount as due. As per the assurance given, the complainant approached the 3^rd opposite party for prepaid connection and as directed by them, complainant approached the 2^nd opposite party and the 2^nd opposite party assured prepaid connection within a period of 3 days. Hence the complainant handed over the Internet device to them. But they have failed to provide the facilities as assured and hence this complaint.

Opposite parties appeared before this Forum and contended that the complaint is not maintainable as per the latest ruling on the same.

Hence the question of maintainability was heard as a preliminary issue.

As seen from the averments in the complaint, the dispute appears to be regarding prepaid internet connection and the facility available for the same. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in General Manager, Telecom Vs. Krishnan & another that “In our opinion when there is a special remedy provided in Sec. 7 B of the Indian Telegraph Act regarding disputes in respect of telephone bills, then the remedy under the Consumer Protection Act is by implication barred. Sec. 7 B of the Telegraph Act reads as under :

Sec. 7 B. Arbitration of Disputes : (1) Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, if any dispute concerning any telegraph line, appliance or apparatus arises between the telegraph authority and the person or whose benefit the line, appliance or apparatus is, or has been provided, the dispute shall be determined by arbitration and shall, for the purpose of such determination, be referred to an Arbitrator appointed by the Central Government either specifically for the determination of that dispute or generally for the determination of disputes under this section. (2) The award of the Arbitrator appointed under Sub-section (1) shall be conclusive between the parties to the dispute and shall not be questioned in any Court. Rule 413 of the “Telegraph Rules provides that all services relating to telephone are subject to Telegraph Rules. A telephone connection can be disconnected by the Telegraph Authority for default of payment under Rule 443 of the Rules”. In the case in hand complainant has alleged that the complainant has been curtailed from availing the prepaid connection which brings the case within the ambit of the above ruling. It can be seen that the dispute is regarding availability of prepaid internet connection and the facility available for the same. As far as these kinds of disputes are concerned, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this case. Hence it is found that this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide dispute regarding the service available under the above. Hence as per the dictum of the apex court, at present, in General Manager, Telecom Vs. Krishnan & another we are of the view that this complaint cannot be entertained by this Forum. Hence the complaint is dismissed as not maintainable with liberty to the complainant to approach any legal authority for redressal of his grievances if any.

In the result, the complaint is found not maintainable before the Forum and hence dismissed with liberty to the complainant to approach any legal authority for redressal of his grievances if any.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 15^th day of December 2011.

Sd/-

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

Sd/-

G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

Sd/-

BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

jb