BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.80 of 2017

Date of Instt.28.03.2017 Date of Decision:23.02.2021

Jaswant Rai Saini Age 51 years S/o Late Sh. Ajit Singh R/o H. No.C-96, Gali No.2, New Hargobind Nagar, Dhogi Road, P. O. Reru, Near Vickey Atta Chaki, Jalandhar-144012.

..........Complainant

Versus

1. Idea Cellular Limited, C/o Batra Sons, 116-A, Nakodar Road, Opp. Preet Hotel, Jalandhar-144001- Through its M.D./C.E.O./Authorized Representative.

2. Idea Cellular Limited, C/O C-105, Industrial Area, Phase-VII, Mohali 160055- through its M.D./C.E.O./Authorized Representative.

3. Idea Cellular Limited, C/o Suman Tower, Plot No.18, Sector 11. Gandhinagar, Gujrat through its M.D./C.E.O./Authorized Representative.

….….. Opposite Parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Kuljit Singh (President)

Smt. Jyotsna (Member)

Present: Sh. A. S. Sohal, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.

Sh. K. K. Arora, Adv. Counsel for OPs No.1 to 3.

Order

Kuljit Singh(President)

1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that the complainant has been availing the internet service in DONGLE from OPs since 2016 in his house vide Idea Mobile No.88728-33660 and it’s a/c No.100039842351 under monthly plan of Rs.750/- + service taxes as applicable for 3G services with cap of 4GB internet data, but data remains unlimited for same validity with speed of 2G services after using 4 GB data of 3G services. That the complainant was satisfied by the services till April/May-2016 but in the month of June the OPs illegally imposed charges of Rs.70/- in the bill period 05.06.2016 to 04.07.2016 as value added services charges which were never taken by the complainant. That the complainant called/mailed to customer care and requested that he did not applied any such value added services as the complainant used this Idea sim card in his Dongle for internet use only in his house and it was never took out of the Dongle then how Rs.70/- imposed as value added services and customer care assured that the same will be cancelled and the amount of Rs.70/- will be waived off in next bill cycle of 05.07.2016 to 04.08.2016 and as per the directions given by OP No.1/Customer Care, the complainant paid the actual bill amount Rs.863/- on 06.07.2016 except charges imposed by OP of Rs.70/-. That the complainant was shocked when the complainant received the bill No.0313655889 for the period of 05.07.2016 to 04.08.2016 and the OPs again imposed value added service charges of Rs.35/- alongwith balance carried forward of Rs.80.03/- then the complainant again approached customer care and nearest Idea Showroom i.e. OP No.1 and requested that he did not applied any such value added services as the complainant used this Idea sim card in his Dongle for internet use only in his house and it was never took out of the Dongle then how Rs.80.03/- and Rs.35/- imposed as value added services and the OP No.1 and customer care again assured that the same will be cancelled and the amount of Rs.115.03/- will be waived in next bill cycle of 05.08.2016 to 04.09.2016 and as per direction given by OP No.1 and customer care, the complainant again paid the actual bill amount Rs.863/- on 10.08.2016 except charges imposed by OPs of Rs.35/- and balance carried forward of Rs.80.03/-. That on 20.08.2016 the OPs debarred the services of the complainant for non-payment of value added charges of Rs.119.79/- which was illegally imposed by the OPs against the wishes of the complainant. The complainant clears all the outstanding of usages till 04.08.2016 to OP No.1. As the OPs barred the services of 3G from 20.08.2016 to complainant for the non-payment of value added service charges of Rs.35/- along with balance carried forward of Rs.80.03/- in the bill cycle 05.07.2016 to 04.08.2016 and then on 20.08.2016 the whole services of 3G + 2G was barred by the OPs whereas the billing cycle period was 05.08.2016 to 04.09.2016 and company given his services only from 05.08.2016 to 20.08.2016, resultant the complainant could not use his 4GB data of 3G services and unlimited data was also not given for 2G services for the said billing cycle period whereas company demanding bill from the complainant for full billing cycle period without giving full services for the same cycle period. That complainant was shocked when the OPs sent bill No. 0319774408 for the period of 05.08.2016 to 04.09.2016 for Rs.1032.29/- along with value added charges of Rs.119.79/- and other credit and charges of Rs.50/- which was not used by the complainant and the services was already barred by the OPs on 20.08.2016 due to nonpayment of Rs.119.79/- + Rs.50/-=Rs.169.79/-. That the complainant again shocked when the complainant again received bill No.0326132086 for the period 05.09.2016 to 04.10.2016 for Rs.1944.79/-. The OPs sent the bill for the period which was never used by the complainant and the OPs already barred the internet services of 3G/2G on 20.08.2016 and even then sending bills to the complainant. The complainant approached the customer care and OP No.1 alongwith above said bills and OP No.1 said that no pay this bill otherwise the next bill will again come for 05.10.2016 to 04.11.2016 albeit services of the complainant have already been debarred on 20.08.2016. That the behavior of the OP is not at all consumer friendly and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to issue no due against the mobile No.88728-33660 and agreed to not to issue further bills and phone calls to the complainant and further OPs be directed to compensate the complainant for the sum of Rs.30,000/- for mental harassment and agony and further OPs be directed to pay Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.

2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, who filed reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed being an abuse of process of law. The bills issued to the complainant are generated by the system and according to the services availed by the complainant and thus cannot be said to be illegal and wrong. That complainant has been rightly charged for availing the services of the OPs. That complainant has only annexed the front pages of all the bills in the complaint due to his malafide intentions of misleading the Court by not disclosing the services availed by him. The complainant was duly explained the reason for the charging of services in all the emails sent by the answering OPs as reverts to the emails sent by the complainant. The current outstanding liability of the complainant amounts to Rs.1844.79. The complaint deserves to be dismissed as allowing the same would amount to permitting the complainant to evade his liability. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant was satisfied by the services till April-May 2016, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

3. In order to prove hiscase, the counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CA alongwith some documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-14 and then closed the evidence.

4. To rebut the evidence of the complainant, the counsel for the OPs tendered into evidence affidavit as Ex.RA alongwith some documents Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-13 and then closed the evidence.

5. We have heard the argument from learned counsel for the respective parties and also gone through the case fileas well as written arguments submitted by counsel for the complainant, very minutely.

6. As already noticed, in reply, it is not denied that  complainant is holder of Idea Cellular post paid mobile connection number 88728-33660 of opposite party number 1, of which, he has been paying the bills regularly, nor, it is in dispute that complainant was charged incremental rental of Rs.750/- + service taxes applicable for 3G service with cap of 4 GB internet data (validity one month) but data remains unlimited, raised under the impugned bills till April/May 2016, respectively. However the only defence as put up  in the reply by opposite parties  is that  complainant subscribed the subscription service One-97 Bollywood Alert through WAP (Wireless Application Protocol) Ex.R-3 to Ex.R-4. The complainant was selectively barred on 25.08.2016 and barred on 27.08.2016 due non-payment of dues. Thereafter, the number was temporarily disconnected on 13.09.2016 and permanently disconnected on 10.11.2016 by OPs. Interestingly enough we are unable to subscribe this contention of opposite parties in as much as  self serving affidavit statement of Manoj Madan, Manager Legal Ex.R-A as there is no document of verifiable nature on that aspect of the matter, in the absence of which, we find that complainant version that he is being charged  a sum of Rs.35/-being complainant subscription service of said through WAP but it is not possible that through dongle the said service can be subscribed without calling and accept in calling of OPs seems to have a semblance of truth.

7. The OPs have failed to produce on record that any consent and approval from complainant qua subscription of said value added service of One-97 Bollywood alert. As such, an adverse inference drawn against Ops and the OPs are liable for the relief claimed as prayed by complainant in this complaint.

8. For these reasons, therefore, we allow the complaint and directed the opposite parties to refund to the complainant all charges levied on account of alleged subscription of service and also issued No Due Certificate in his favour and pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.2000/-in lieu of consolidated amount of compensation. This order shall be complied with within 45 days from the date of the receipt of copy of this order.

9. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room after its due compliance.

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:

23^rd Day of February 2021

(Kuljit Singh)

President

(Jyotsna)

Member