pankaj kakkar filed a consumer case on 17 Mar 2023 against IDEA/VODAFONE COMPANY in the Rupnagar Consumer Court. The case no is CC/22/87 and the judgment uploaded on 28 Apr 2023.
Punjab
Rupnagar
CC/22/87
pankaj kakkar - Complainant(s)
Versus
IDEA/VODAFONE COMPANY - Opp.Party(s)
Inderpal vohra
17 Mar 2023
ORDER
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ROPAR
Consumer Complaint No.87 of 2022
Date of Decision: 17.03.2023
Pankaj Kakkar, aged about 39 years son of Nand Kishore Kakkar, resident of House No.56-A, Kalgidhar Market, Rupnagar, Tehsil & District Rupnagar
…..Complainant
Versus
Idea/Vodafone Company Office at C 105, Industrial Area Phase VII Mohali Tehsil and District SAS Nagar, 160055 through its Manager
Gurpreet Singh Executive Officer Vodafone (VI) Mini Store Near Junior DPS School Ropar and Axis Bank, Ropar, Tehsil & District Ropar
(Complaint under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act)
QUORUM:
KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT
RAMESH KUMAR GUPTA, MEMBER
ARGUED BY:
For complainant: Inderpal Vohra, Advocate
For Ops: Sh. Sahil Vashishat, Advocate
ORDER
PER KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT
The present complaint has been filed by the complainant on the averments that the complainant has visited UAE for his father’s business purposes and the complainant has booked his ticket from Delhi to Sharjah on 22.3.2022 and the complainant has returned to India on 30.03.2022. For purchasing the goods and due to business purposes, the complainant has got the pack of the OP company of Rs.2999/- from his mobile phone at Ropar and the complainant has paid Rs.3000/- to the OP for the said pack and the pack was activated on 25.3.2022 and the complainant was given assurance by the customer care of the OP that this pack is properly working in UAEW and complainant will not face any difficulty while using this package. The complainant reached in UAE on 25.3.22 but the complainant was shocked and astonished when he came to know that the pack which was provided by the OP was not working in UAE and due to this reason the complainant was unable to get OTP on his phone and was unable to make the online payment to the shops in UAE. During the stay at Sharjah the complainant has sends the email to customer care on 25.3.22 regarding non working of the package and then again on 28.3.2022 the complainant send mail by VI and then the customer care replied that the number is not registered with us provided valid number. On 30.3.2022, when the complainant reached at the Airport Sharjah then the complainant came to know that their flight has been cancelled and then the complainant has inquired from the Airport Authorities regarding cancellation of the flight, then the Airport Authorities have told the complainant that they have already send the notification regarding cancellation of the flight but due to switch off the mobile number of the complainant, he could not get the notification and then the complainant returned to India by arranging emergency return ticket of Rs.66,000/- however the ordinary ticket of return to Sharjah to Delhi is Rs.20000/- and in this way the complainant has suffered monetary loss of Rs.46,000/- in excess due to the fault of the OP. Then on 31.3.2022 the complainant again send mail to VI and informed that the complainant is using the sim/number of the mobile since the last 10 years and same is in working and then on 5.4.22 the complainant again requested the OP to refund the amount of the pack and to provide the financial loss.
Upon notice, OPs have appeared and filed written reply and contested the complaint of the complainant by raising preliminary objections; that the present complaint is false, frivolous and vexatious; that the complainant has not come to this Commission with clean hands; that the complainant has not disclosed the mobile number qua which the present complaint has been filed. On merits, it is stated that the complainant ported in the mobile number 98720-20734 to the network of the Ops and became its subscriber in the post paid category. The compensation as sought by the complainant is not only exorbitant but an attempt by him to blow the issue out of proportion. The hypothetical and frivolous versions with respect to compensation claimed are not only without any basis, but also not substantiated by any evidence, in any case whatsoever. OPs prayed that complaint is without any merits and deserves to be dismissed with cost.
In order to prove the case, the counsel for complainant has tendered duly sworn affidavit of complainant Ex.C1 along with documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C11 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OP1/A to Ex.OP1/E and closed the evidence.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the complaint file along with documents very minutely.
After perusing the case file, it reveals that the complainant has placed on record Ex.C9, where the company admitted that International Pack of Rs.2999/- was activated on 25.3.2022 on mobile no.98720-20734. As per Ex.OP1/D the company has submitted that waiver of Rs.3528.82 was given in the invoice dated 21.5.2022 to the complainant.
As per the documents placed on record, the bench is not inclined to grant the refund of the amount of Air Tickets and the claim of the same is hereby rejected.
In view our above discussion, we dismiss the present complaint with no order as to cost. Free certified copies be sent to the parties, as per rules. The file be indexed & consigned to the record room.
(Kuljit Singh)
President
(Ramesh Kumar Gupta)
Member
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.