DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAS NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.1274 of 2019
Date of institution: 24.07.2019
Date of decision : 05.10.2020
Parveen Kumar, resident of House No.669, Phase-1, Sector-55, Mohali, Punjab-160055.
…….Complainant
Versus
Independent TV Limited, H Block, 1st Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani, Knowledge City – Koparkhairne, Navi Mumbai, Mumbai through General Manager/Authorised signatory.
……..Opposite Party
Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President
Ms. Natasha Chopra, Member.
Shri Inderjit, Member
Present: Shri Manoj Kumar Rohilla, counsel for the complainant.
OP ex-parte.
Order dictated by :- Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.
Order
The present order of ours will dispose of a complaint under Consumer Protection Act, filed by the complainant (hereinafter referred as ‘CC’ for short) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred as ‘OP’ for short), wherein it is mentioned, that he has approached this Commission due to adoption of an unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the OP. It is further mentioned that after going through advertisements published by the OP in newspapers and flashed through website, the CC booked one DTH connection by paying booking amount of Rs.499/-. As per the scheme, the customer had to pay Rs.1,999/- (refundable) for new DTH connection. Besides pre booking amount of Rs.499/, Rs.1,500/- were to be paid at the time of installation of DTH Connection and Rs.250/- were to be paid as installation charges. As per assurance through advertisements, maximum time duration for installation was within 30 to 45 days of booking. It is further mentioned that after waiting for 10 months, the executive of the OP visited the residence of the CC and installed DTH connection on 16.12.2018 and an amount of Rs.1750/- was paid by the CC for installation. Thus total amount of Rs.2250/- was paid by the CC (i.e. Rs.1750/- at the time of installation plus Rs.499/- as booking amount). It was promised that the CC will receive many channels including HD Channels including many other paid channels with 500 Free to Air Channels on this payment which is full payment for one year. However, after 31st December, the OP removed/withdrew all HD channels, and when CC made a complaint on this, he was informed that his HD channels are removed. The CC was further informed that Ops were upgrading their system and soon this problem will be resolved and the CC will start receiving all channels. As per Regulation 17 of Telecommunication (Broadcasting and cable) Service Standards of Quality of Service and Consumer Protection (Addressable Systems) Regulations 2017, the OP cannot interfere and alter the package of the CC. Thereafter the CC requested the OP many times on its helpline number, but the OP failed to provide the committed service. On 12.06.2019 the OP totally closed the service of the complainant. When CC contacted the OP, he was informed that their service on 12.06.2019 was for “uncertain days” and the CC will be duly updated as and when their service starts again. However, the OP failed to start its service till September, 2019. The CC contacted OP many times for refund of his full amount but in vain.
Thus alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the CC has sought the refund of Rs.2250/- and compensation to the tune of Rs.40,000/- for mental harassment and inconvenience etc. Further CC has demanded Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses. Complaint of the CC is duly signed and verified. Further the same is also supported by an affidavit of the CC.
2. The OP has chosen to remain ex-parte. It is important to mention here that the OP was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 22.01.2020 of this Commission.
3. Since the entire evidence of the CC is on the file and the OP is already ex-parte, we feel that no prejudice is going to be caused to any of the parties if the present complaint is decided on merits. Otherwise also the present Consumer Protection Act, is a Special Act which is enacted to provide speedy justice to the parties.
4 It is writ large on the file that the CC had subscribed the services of the OP for one DTH connection and initially paid Rs. 499/- as booking amount. After 10 months of payment of initial amount of Rs. 499/-, the OP installed DTH connection on 16.12.2018 and received Rs.1,750/- from the CC. In total Rs.2,250/- were paid by the CC to the OPs . However, later on the services were withdrawn by the OP by disclosing that they are upgrading the system, but despite several requests and queries of the CC, services were not restored.
5. Since the OP is already ex-parte and no one has come forward to rebut the contentions of the CC or counter the allegations, in such circumstances we have no alternative except to believe the averments of the CC. The evidence of the CC also appears to be cogent, reliable and trustworthy. We feel, it is proved on the file that the OP by not rendering the proper services to the CC and by not continuing with the DTH connection and various channels services, has committed deficiency in service despite the fact that the OP had already received Rs.2,250/- in total from the CC. As such the present complaint is allowed and we make the following order:-
a) The OP will refund the amount of Rs.2,250/- to the CC along with interest @ 18% per annum from the dates of deposits.
b) The OP is further burdened to pay a consolidated amount of compensation of Rs.3,000/- to the CC.
Compliance of the aforesaid order be made by the OP within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of order, certified copies of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.
Announced
October 05, 2020
(Sanjiv Dutt Sharma)
President
(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)
Member
(Inderjit)
Member
