Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/137/2019

Mohinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Jio Infocomm Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Devinder Kumar

05 Mar 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

                                                    ========

 

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/137/2019
Date of Institution	:	07/03/2019
Date of Decision	:	05/03/2021

 

Mohinder Singh S/o Sh. Bakshi Ram, R/o H.No. 1333, Sec.68, Mohali.

…..Complainant

 

V E R S U S

 

1.      Jio Infocomm Limited, C-135, Indl. Area, Sector 74, Mohali, through its Manager.

 

2.      Reliance Jio Centre, 87–88, Sub-City Center, Sec.34-A, Chandigarh, through its Incharge.

…… Opposite Parties

QUORUM:	RATTAN SINGH THAKUR	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                                                                       

ARGUED BY:	:	Sh. Devinder Kumar, Counsel for Complainant.
	:	Sh. Ammish Goel, Counsel for Opposite Parties.

 

Per Surjeet Kaur, Member

 

1.         Adumbrated in brief, the facts necessary for the disposal of the instant Consumer Complaint are, the complainant, after ascertaining the details/information available on Jio App. regarding the International Roaming services offered by Jio Telecom Company in as many as 170 countries, decided to purchase Jio International Roaming Pack of Rs.1101/- with a validity of 28 days in connection with his visit to Montenegro, a country located in the vicinity of South-east Europe. Since, the complainant intended to visit various towns and cities of this beautiful country, he scheduled his stay in this country for 20 days starting on November, 2018 to 4th December, 2018 including journey period. It is pertinent to mention here that there is no direct flight availability between India and Montenegro. Therefore, the complainant had to travel from New Delhi, India to Tivat, Montenegro with one stopover in Moscow, Russia during both to and fro journey. The complainant, exercising cautious approach, purchased International Roaming (IR) Pack from Jio Telecom Company for Rs.1101/- on 13.11.2018 on mobile No.7986315588  with 28 days validity after duly checking on their website that the list of 170 countries in which Jio Telecom Company promises to provide voice, data connectivity and SMS services under this IR Pack do contain the name of Montenegro so that he does not face any difficulty on reaching Montenegro with regards to using telecom services, and most importantly to ensure that he could remain in contact with his family and friends back in India. Copy of List of countries, as available on JIO website and that of SMS received from JIO confirming purchase of IT Package by the complainant is at Annexure-C-1 & C-2. The complainant on reaching Montenegro on November, 2018 in the afternoon, felt disgusted on noticing that neither during his journey from Delhi to Tivat including the stopover period of about five hours in Moscow, Russia, nor on reaching Tivat, Montenegro the telecom services neither from Jio Telecom Company nor from its local partner operator were available. As such the complainant had to face lot of problems and hardships due to non-availability of IR services. His movement got totally stuck because of non-availability of data connectivity; even locating a local telecom store was very difficult for him in such a situation. The complainant, after waiting for two days, when he didn't receive any signal either from Jio Telecom Company or its overseas partner operator, reached a local telecom company store and purchased a new sim card connection from Telenor on 15th November, 2018 which provided some sort of relief to the complainant. The complainant had to shell out an additional sum of about Rs.1500/- (17 Euros) for purchasing and recharging this sim card during his 20 days stay in Montenegro. Copies of relevant bills/vouchers are at Annexure C-3. The complainant, waited for another one week to see if the connectivity from Jio Telecom Company or its local partner operator in Montenegro was available. After fully ensuring that there was, in fact, no connectivity available either from Jio Telecom Company or its any local partner operator, the complainant wrote an email to Jio customers care team on 23rd November, 2018 explaining complete situation of the matter and sought refund of amount paid for the IR Pack. In reply, the Jio customer's care, while apologizing for the inconvenience caused, confirmed vide email dated 24^th November, 2018 having registered the complainant's service request assuring further that updates in this matter shall be posted within next 24 hours. Copies of letters dated 23.11.2018 & 24.11.2018 are at Annexure C-4 & C-5. The complainant, after waiting for one week again wrote another email on 2nd December, 2018 seeking refund of his money. In reply to Jio customers care email, the complainant provided on the same day on 2nd December, 2018 the necessary information/details about the WhatsApp numbers he was using in Montenegro. Copy of complainant’s letter and that of Jio dated 2.12.2018 are at Annexure-C-6 & C-7. On 3rd December, 2018, at about 7.00 pm (Local Russian Time), when the complainant was about to fly from Moscow airport on his return journey back to India, saw that Jio Telecom Company signal had suddenly started appearing on his phone. Out of curiosity just to reconfirm whether the network was really accessible from there, the complainant dialed one of relative's number in India and disconnected the call after less than two minutes talk. The complainant very honestly confirmed to Jio customer care team while sitting in the airplane at Moscow airport itself that at Moscow airport Jio Telecom Company signal was available. The complainant, on reaching back home on 4th December, 2018, while visiting the Jio App. noticed that the Jio Customer care team had closed his service request on 25th November, 2018 without its resolution. The complainant took up the matter again with the Jio Customer care team through email and phone requesting them to reopen his service request and arrange to refund his money. Copy of complainant letter dated 7.12.2018 is at Annexure-C-8. The complainant since then exchanged many communications with the Jio Customer Care team requesting for refund of his money but to no avail. The only vague and irrelevant reply received from the Jio Customer Care team was that since the network services were available at Moscow airport in Russia, so no refund of money can be allowed. The complainant while seeing no ray of hope from Jio customer care team, took the matter before the Appellate Authority of the company vide email dated 15.12.2018 seeking its intervention and for issuance of necessary directions to Jio Telecom Company to refund the money but here also the complainant received no better reply than that of Jio customer care team. Copy of complainant email dated 15.12.2018 and that of Appellate Authority dated 15.12.2018 are at Annexure-C-9 & C-10.  Against the acts of the opposite parties complainants sent a registered legal notice to the Opposite Parties on 14.01.2019 through his counsel, the opposite parties didn't even respond to the legal notice got served by the complainant. Copy of legal notice is at Annexure C-11. Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties, the complainant has filed the instant Consumer Complaint.
2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case.
3.         Opposite Parties in their joint written statement, while admitting the basic facts of the case, pleaded that the complainant is not the owner of the mobile number 7986315988 and neither the complainant is authorized by the actual owner of the mobile number to file the instant complaint. The complainant's IR recharge for Rs.1101/- was successful and the same was acknowledged. However, the complainant has not disclosed that a message and e-mail was also sent on the registered e-mail and mobile number 7986315988 sharing certain guidelines for updating the mobile device for enabling the customer to utilize the IR services once the customer reaches the international destination. The answering OPS have a bilateral tie up in Russia as such the customer was able to make calls from there, however, the answering Opposite Parties have sponsored network tie up in Montenegro and the customer was required to update the settings as per the guidelines shared with the customer. The complainant is trying to shift the onus of his inability to update the device which is manually carried out by the holder of the device as such the instant complaint is liable to be dismissed as no deficiency in services were caused by the answering Opposite Parties. The Customer care after receiving any e-mail forwards the grievance to the relevant vertical to verify the factual veracity after receiving the e-mail from the registered e-mail of the customer on 23/11/2018 and the Customer care of Opposite Parties replied to the customer. However, there was no alternate number provided by the complainant as such he could not be contacted.  With regard to the complainant writing an e-mail on 02.12.2018 seeking refund of his recharge money, it has been pleaded that the complainant has himself admitted that he was able to connect and make calls and also made a call to India clearly demonstrates that there the IR roaming recharge was successfully done by the Opposite Parties and there was no error. The customer was to act upon guidelines shared to the customer on the registered e-mail ID and mobile number 7986315988. Since the customer had used the IR partially as such customer is not entitled to any refund more so under the facts and circumstances that there was no deficiency on the part of the Opposite Parties. The IR roaming recharge was successfully done by the answering Opposite Parties as the complainant was able to make calls from Russia where the answering Opposite Parties have a bilateral tie up in Russia & as such no manual settings are required and the complainant was able to make calls from the customer's number without any problem. The entire exercise of writing e-mails and complaints has been initiated by the complainant to hide the fault of the customer owing the mobile number in question and to unduly enrich himself by claiming compensation and refund despite making call at Russia. Pleading that there was no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint.
4.         The complainant has filed rejoinder, wherein he has reiterated all the averments, contained in the complaint, and repudiated those, contained in the written version of Opposite Parties.
5.         Parties were permitted to place their respective evidence on record, in support of their contentions.
6.         We have gone through the entire record and heard the arguments addressed by the Ld. Counsel for the Parties.
7.         After careful perusal of the record, it is a matter of fact that the Complainant was not provided with the promised services for his visit in the foreign/alien land and due to non-availability of the internet connection at an unknown place, the Complainant had to face lot many challenges over there and eventually, had to purchase a new sim card connection from Telenor on 15.11.2018. The fact of purchasing new connection is fortified from Annexure C-3.
8.         Apparently, due to non-availability of the internet connection, the Complainant requested the Opposite Parties for refund of the money spent for purchasing the Pack of the Opposite Parties. Various e-mails regarding the same are on record. Pertinently, per Annexure C-9 the Complainant himself confessed of using the internet when the same was provided at the Moscow airport in Russia while boarding back to India and for checking the same, the Complainant used the same for only 01.04 minutes which is also part of record.
9.         In this view of the matter, to our understanding, the Opposite Parties completely failed to provide proper services to the Complainant at the right time when he was at an unknown place. Notably, in today’s time, it is difficult to think life without the internet connectivity and too when one person travels outside to an unknown/ alien place. The Complainant bought the International Roaming (IR) Pack of the Opposite Parties to facilitate himself and not to rush from pillar to post, firstly, to buy new internet connection in the foreign country and thereafter, requesting so many times for the genuine claim of refund of the amount spent towards the purchase of the aforesaid Pack. Hence, the act of the Opposite Parties for not providing the proper services at the appropriate time and forcing the Complainant to face lot of harassment in the foreign land as his movement has totally been stuck due to non-availability of telecom services. Not only this, the Opposite Parties inspite of repeated requests made by the Complainant have not refunded the amount and rather arbitrarily denied his request and forced him to pursue his matter through his unnecessary ligation. Thus, finding a definite deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, we have no other alternative, but to allow the present complaint against it.
10.         In the light of above observations, we are of the concerted view that the present complaint of the Complainant deserves to succeed against the Opposite Parties, and the same is allowed, qua them. The Opposite Parties are, jointly & severally, directed:-

(i)      To refund amount of I.R Pack i.e. Rs.1101/- to the Complainant;

 

(ii)     To pay Rs.3500/- to the complainant towards compensation for deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and for causing harassment caused to him.

 

(iii)    To pay Rs.3500/- as litigation expenses.      

 

11.         This order be complied with by the Opposite Parties within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr. No. (i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr. No.(iii) above. 
12.         Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

05^th Mar., 2021

                        Sd/-  

(RATTAN SINGH THAKUR)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

(SURJEET KAUR)

MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

(SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)

MEMBER

 “Dutt”