Delhi

North East

RBT/CC/189/2022

POOJA - Complainant(s)

Versus

JIO SERVICE CENTER - Opp.Party(s)

09 Feb 2023

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

RBT/Complaint Case No. 189/22

 

 

In the matter of:

 

	Mrs. Pooja W/o Sh. Rupesh R/o K-74, J J Colony, Wazirpur, Delhi-110052	Complainant
	Versus
	Jio Service Centre C-34/4, Lawrence Road Industrial Area, Delhi-110035	Opposite Party

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:        JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                          DATE OF ORDER :

09.03.18 18.10.22 09.02.23

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

ORDER

      Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of  the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Case of the Complainant

1. The facts of the case as revealed from the record are that the Complainant purchased a sim of Jio company having mobile no. 7011462112 expecting full speed internet and high data for a sum of Rs. 500/- from Opposite Party. The Complainant stated that on 16.12.17 she got admitted in Lok Nayak hospital as she is pregnant and she had a miscarriage of her 2  months child while pregnancy, at that time her husband shows her the Kapil Sharma show but due to non-working of the internet they were unable to watch the show and got upset. The Complainant submitted that they had lodged complaint with the Opposite Party many times for low internet speed and less data but the Opposite Party advised them that it will take 3 months to resolve the issue of internet. The Complainant requested the Opposite Party to refund their money but Opposite Party refused the same. The Complainant had sent email to Opposite Party on 23.02.18 and got reply from Opposite Party on 25.02.18 in which it is stated that their internet problem will be resolved by 23.04.18. The Complainant had called the helpline no. of Opposite Party and the officials of Opposite Party give them the complaint no. 624605 and advised them to knock the door of the court. The Complainant did not get high speed internet and high data for which he had bought the sim card of Opposite Party company. Hence, this shows deficiency on the part of Opposite Party. Complainant has prayed for a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/-.  

 

Case of Opposite Party

2. The Opposite Party contested the case and filed written statement to the complaint of the Complainant. It is stated by the Opposite Party that main grievance of the Complainant is that her internet connection has not been working properly due to erratic signal and despite complaints, Opposite Party has not rectified and fixed the connectivity problem as a result huge inconvenience has been caused to her. It is submitted herein that internet speed committed to the Complainant at the time of subscribing to the connection was provided to the Complainant and further Complainant enjoyed internet services of Opposite Party. Internet speed promised to the Complainant is running at the speed committed to the Complainant and Complainant has enjoyed data services of Opposite Party to her entire satisfaction. Without prejudice, complaints were received from Complainant and same were promptly attended by the staff of Opposite Party and all grievances of the Complainant were redressed. Staff of Opposite Party after thoroughly checking internet speed explained to the Complainant that internet speed on the instrument of the Complainant is not slow and is working fast and further there is no disruption in the enjoyment of internet services of Opposite Party by the Complainant. The Complainant in order to harass and embroil Opposite Party in false and frivolous litigation has filed present complaint which perse is not maintainable and is gross abuse of benevolent provisions of law and is liable to be dismissed at the threshold itself.
3. It is further stated by the Opposite Party that present Hon’ble Forum does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate present complaint as it is only the courts/forums/tribunals at Mumbai which are vested with exclusive jurisdiction to try present complaint because as per the warranty card judicial forums at Mumbai have been given exclusive jurisdiction to try any dispute emanating from sale of produce in dispute.

Rejoinder to written statement of Opposite Party

4. The Complainant filed rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Party and has denied the averments made in the complaint. The Complainant has reiterated the assertions made in the complaint.

Evidence of the parties

5. The Complainant in support of her complaint filed her affidavit wherein she has supported the assertions made in the complaint. The Opposite Party in support of its case has filed the affidavit of Ms. Shruti Chandra, Office at R.K four Square Building 4, DLF Phase-II,DLF Cyber City, Sector-24 Gurugram, Haryana, presently at Delhi in which she has supported the case of the Opposite Party as mentioned in the written statement.

 

Arguments and conclusion

6. We have heard the Husband of Complainant. We have also perused the file and the written arguments filed by the parties. The case of the Complainant is that she had purchased Sim of Jio Company for full speed internet and high date for sum of Rs. 500/- from the Opposite Party on 07.11.17. After purchasing the sim there was low internet speed and less data in their connection for that they have taken up the matter with the Opposite Party to resolve the internet issue or refund their money. The Complainant had sent email to Opposite Party on 23.02.18 and got reply from the Opposite Party on 25.02.18 saying that as per update on your service request no. you are facing connectivity issue as there is limited Jio coverage in your area at the moment. However, a new Jio site is planned in your area which is expected to go live by 23.04.18. Please be assured as once the issue is revolved you will be able to use our service seamlessly. But in spite of assurance of the Opposite Party, Complainant did not get high speed internet and high data. As per Opposite Party the internet speed committed to the Complainant at the time of subscribing to the connection was provided to the Complainant and further Complainant enjoy internet service of the Opposite Party. Internet  speed promise to the Complainant is running at the speed committed to the Complainant and Complainant has enjoyed data service of the Opposite Party to her entire satisfaction.
7. Further it is stated by the Opposite Party that the internet speed on the instrument of the Complainant is not slow and is working fast and there is no disruption in the enjoyment of the internet service of the Opposite Party by the Complainant. Hence, complaint is not maintainable. Opposite Party also raise the issue of jurisdiction of the Commission as it is only the courts/forums/tribunals at Mumbai which are vested with exclusive jurisdiction to try present complaint because as per warranty card judicial forum at Mumbai have been given exclusive jurisdiction to try in dispute emanating from sale of product in dispute.
8. Since, internet service is provided to Complainant within the jurisdiction of the Commission hence as per Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the cause of action arises within the jurisdiction of the Commission. Secondly, Opposite Party did not produce copy of warranty card issued to the complainant regarding jurisdiction of judicial forum at Mumbai. With regard to low internet speed Opposite party itself admitted vide their email dated 25.02.18 there was connectivity issue in the area of the Complainant and have assured the Complainant that they were install/setup new Jio service site by 23.04.18 after that there will be seamless services of the internet in the area of the Complainant.
9. In view of the above discussion, the complaint is allowed. Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- on account of mental harassment and litigation charges to the Complainant along with interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of this order till recovery.  
10. Order announced on 09.02.23.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)           Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President