By Jayasree Kallat, Member Petition was filed on 22.04.09. The complainant purchased a SIM card with mobile No 9744437817 from the authorized show room of Idea. It was activated as life long connection, after accepting the Photostat copy of front page of the complainant’s SSLC book as identity proof. After a few days of activation connection was barred without the consent of the complainant. The complainant is alleging negligence and deficiency of service on the part of opposite party for disconnecting the mobile phone without prior notice. Due to the negligence of opposite party complainant had to face many hardships. As this phone No. was obtained for various important matters like application for jobs, Matrimonial and other academic activities. Complainant has filed the petition seeking relief against the opposite party. Opposite party filed version denying the averments in the complaint. The opposite party is only a channel partner for Idea Mobile connections and is only authorised to sell pre-paid connection and activate. Thereafter the connection is monitored by the company who is entitled to disconnect the service for reasons. The connection is granted subject to the conditions that the service provider finds the ID proof of the applicant is in acceptance and is in accordance with the various instructions issued by the central government from time to time. Along with the applications for purchasing pre-paid connection the applicant was expected to submit ID proof which could be one of the several documents like Electricity bill, voters ID, driving license, Student card etc. The Complainant made available only the attested photocopy of the first page of the SSLC Book which is not one of the documents prescribed. Therefore the complainant was instructed to make available any one of the above mentioned document which he assured to produce within two days. On the basis of the assurance given by the complainant, the connection was activated on 06.04.2009. He did not produce any of the ID proof as laid down. Hence the application was forwarded to the local office of the service provider. The service provider found that the ID proof submitted was not in conformity with the guidelines issued by the government and hence company deactivated the connection. The opposite parties are not authorized to deactivate the connection. Deactivation was not carried out by the opposite party. Deactivation of the connection was for reason that no ID proof was submitted and the proof as referred by the complainant was insufficient. The complainant has to submit ID proof in accordance with the rules in order to enable the service provider to retain activation. The only point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled for the relief sought in the petition.? PW1 was examined Ext.A1 marked on complainant’s side. No evidence on opposite party’s side. The case of the complainant is that he had obtained a Sim Card connection from the Show room of Idea with phone No.9744437817. While taking the connection the complainant had provided a Photostat copy of the front page of the SSLC book as identity proof. After a few days the connection was barred without the consent of the complainant. The opposite party states that they have no authority to activate or retain activation. The opposite party is only authorized to sell prepaid connection and activate at the first instance. The connection is there after monitored by the company who is entitled to disconnect the service if there is any valid reason. The connection is granted subject to the condition the service provider finds ID proof of the applicant in acceptance and in accordance with the various instructions issued by the central government from time to time. The opposite party cannot extent any relief claimed by the complainant. The complainant had provided the front page of the SSLC Book which is not sufficient proof. The complainant was asked to submit valid ID proof as stipulated by the central government. But the complainant has not produced any of the documents like Electricity bill, Voters ID, Driving license, student’s card etc. For the reason of non providing sufficient ID proof the connection of the complainant was barred. The complainant had filed a petition seeking interim order to activate the barred connection which was allowed by this forum. Opposite party was directed to activate the mobile No.9744437817 immediately. Opposite party has submitted that as per the direction of the Forum the opposite party had reactivated the connection. Opposite party does not have the power to reactivate. Hence they had forwarded the order to idea mobile cellular service who had reactivated as per the order of the forum. In our opinion complainant had approached the forum because the opposite party had barred the connection of his mobile phone. By the interim order of the forum the connection was reactivated. Hence one portion of the prayer of the complainant is already complied by the Opposite party. The complainant had sought for compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- because he had suffer many hardships as the phone No. was disconnected. In our opinion the deactivation took place because the complainant did not provide sufficient ID proof. We can’t find any deficiency on the part of opposite party. Hence the complainant is not entitled for any compensation. The complainant is hereby directed to approach the opposite party with sufficient ID proof to retain the mobile phone connection. As the complainant has not provided sufficient proof we are of the opinion that the complaint is liable to be dismissed. Pronounced in the open court this the 27th day of July 2010 Date of filing:22.04.09 SD/-PRESIDENT SD/- MEMBER SD/-MEMBER APPENDIX Documents exhibited for the complainant: A1. Photocopy of receipt. Documents exhibited for the opposite party. Nil. Witness examined for the complainant: PW1. Larry Liston (Complainant) Witness examined for the opposite party. None Sd/- President (Forwarded/By order) SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT.
| | [HONOURABLE MRS. Jayasree Kallat, MA.,] Member[HONOURABLE MR. G Yadunadhan, BA.,LLB.,] PRESIDENT[HONOURABLE MR. L Jyothikumar, LLB.,] Member | | 
