DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,
SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092
C.C. NO. 942/12
Shri Priya Prakash
S/o Shri R.K. Singha
R/o H. No. 70, 2nd Floor
West Guru Angad Nagar Ext.
Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092 ….Complainant
Vs.
- M/s. Idea
A-68, Sector-64
R.O. – Suman Tower
Plot No. 18, Sector No. 11
Gandhi Nagar - 362011
- M/s. Idea
COMMNSOL
Pankaj Plaza, DDA Market
Nirman Vihar Metro Station
Delhi – 110 092 ….Opponents
Date of Institution: 19.11.2012
Judgment Reserved for : 11.08.2016
Judgment Passed on : 29.08.2016
CORUM:
Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)
Dr. P.N. Tiwari (Member)
Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)
Order By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)
JUDGEMENT
This complaint has been filed by Shri Priya Prakash against M/s. Idea (OP-2) alleging deficiency in services.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant applied for portability from his existing service provider MTNL to OP i.e. M/s. Idea. The complainant also mentioned that OP provided SIM bearing no. 89910485011208060637 and was promised that SIM will be activated within 7 days. It is further stated that MTNL was also informed on 04.09.2012. Despite several visits and requests and number of complaints, SIM was not activated. Feeling aggrieved, complainant was constrained to approach this Forum. The complainant has prayed for activation of SIM, Rs. 80,000/- towards compensation for harassment, mental agony and pain and Rs. 15,000/- as cost of litigation.
Notice of the complaint was duly served on OPs. OP-1 filed their written statement and submitted that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint as per Sec. 7.3 of Indian Telegraph Act and denied all the allegations made in the complaint. They have also raised objection regarding the mis-joinder of parties.
The complainant filed rejoinder to the WS and reiterated contents of his complaint. Thereafter, both the parties filed their evidence by way of affidavit. The complainant examined himself.
The OP examined Shri Puneet Tripathi, authorized signatory of Idea Cellular Ltd.
3. We have heard the arguments from both the counsels and have perused the material placed on record. First, deciding the preliminary objections, regarding the jurisdiction of this forum to adjudicate this complaint is concerned, we, as per notification no. 2-17/2013, issued by Department of Telecommunications and Judgement of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, JK Mittal vs. UOI WP(C) C8285/2010 have jurisdiction to entertain complaints filed by the consumer against the telecom service providers.
Perusal of material placed before us, shows that the complainant had applied for mobile portability for which he was given unique portability code, bearing UPC No. MD 296769 by the service provider. He then informed the OP.
The Customer Application Form (CAF) and photocopy of the SIM annexed with the complaint bearing the SIM No. 89910485011208060637 and it was nowhere the defence of OP that CAF was forged/fabricated. Customer can get SIM only after paying necessary charges.
Thus, we direct the OP to activate the SIM of the complainant, after complainant completes all the necessary formalities required for mobile number portability within 15 days. We award Rs. 1,500/- as compensation. We also direct Rs. 1,000/- towards the cost of litigation, as the complainant has not placed anywhere on record to quantify what damages he suffered by the omission on behalf of OP.
Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.
File be consigned to Record Room.
(DR. P.N. TIWARI) (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)
Member Member
(SUKHDEV SINGH)
President
