D.o.F:31/08/2010

D.o.O:30/9/2011

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                             CC.NO.190/10

                     Dated this, the 30th     day of September 2011

PRESENT:

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                         : MEMBER

SMT.BEENA.K.G                             : MEMBER

Smt.Shylaja.K.P,

Podikkalam Parmba House,

Kandoth Po,Payyanur,Kannur Dt.

(Adv.Shajid Kammadam,Kasaragod)     :  Complainant

Manager, Idea Show room

Shan communications,

Bekal International Building, Hosdurg,    :  Opposite party

Kanhangad.

(Adv.T.V.Rajendran,Kasaragod)

                                                       ORDER

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ       : PRESIDENT

The grievance of the complainant is as follows:

     Complainant is the post paid subscriber of Idea Cellular phone connection with  subscriber No.9947666000.   Opposite party charged ` 2000/- for providing the said fancy number .  Complainant availed this connection on 23/1/2010 on a monthly rent of `500/- and the scheme permits the complainant to use the talk time worth ` 600/-.  The credit limit of the subscriber was ` 5400/-.  The complainant is entitled to get a hard copy of the bill prior to the bill due date under the Telecommunication Tariff order 2004.  The complainant has been prompt in payment of  bill.  However the opposite party did not issue the copy of the bill of long distance call through out the billing cycles in violation to the Telecommunication Tariff Order 2004.  Since the complainant found certain discrepancies  in the calculation of the bill she caused a lawyer notice  through her advocate calling upon the  opposite party to furnish the itemized bill of  long distance calls.  But the opposite party turned down to her request .  Complainant paid the  basic rent for the month of July on 10/8/2010 and reserved her right to pay the balance amount on receipt of itemized bill but the opposite party unilaterally suspended the service of outgoing  calls on 12/8/2010 without prior notice ignoring the guidelines of TRAI.  Hence the complainant was constrained to take a new connection of another mobile service provider.  The failure to furnish the itemized  bills in a reasonable time  inspite of the directions of TRAI amounts to deficiency in service.  Hence the complaint for compensation and costs.

2.  According to opposite party they have not charged `2000/- for allotting the number.  She  was very irregular in payment of rent.  On 10/8/10 complainant paid  only ` 500/-.  The  actual due was `1505/- on that day.  The complainant should pay the entire call charge.  She has no right to retain or reserve the payment of  balance .  The non payment of bill is a ground  for disconnection of service.  This fact was repeatedly informed the complainant. On the basis of the  lawyer notice caused at the instance of complainant the Idea Cellular Limited M.G.Road Kochi has sent the bill to the complainant  but  she  refused  to accept it.  The opposite party is  only a franchisee and they have no option to issue itemized bill.  Itemized  bill  has to be  sent from the Idea Cellular Limited, Kochi.  The opposite party has no authority to restore the connection or issue itemized bill.  The forum  has no jurisdiction to entertain this type of complaint and the complainant is not entitled  for  any relief from opposite party.  Hence the complaint is deserves a dismissal.

3.  Complainant’s husband Sri.Babu as her authorized representative filed proof affidavit as PW1.  Exts.A1 to A18 marked through PW1.  On the side of opposite party Sri.Naseer.C the franchisee of opposite party adduced evidence as DW1 in tune with the version of opposite party and Exts.B1 to B6 marked .  PW1 & DW1 cross examined by the respective counsels.  Heard  them and documents perused carefully.

4.   The definite case of complainant is that inspite of specific request at the time  of  applying  for the mobile connection itself for itemized bills the  opposite party failed to issue it . The fact that complainant caused a registered lawyer notice demanding the itemized bill itself shows that  there is lethargy on the part of opposite party in supplying detailed bills.  Normally one would cause lawyer notice only when their direct attempts did not yield the result.  In evidence of DW1 admitted that complainant deposited `2500/- to get the fancy subscriber number.

5.   The complainant herself pleaded that she paid only the rent  ` 500/- towards the July 2010 bill reserving  her right to pay the balance on receipt of itemized bill .  Against  the averment the contention of opposite party is that the customer has no right to  retain the payment of balance and she should have paid the  entire  call charge.  The crucial  question to be answered by opposite party is then why did they accept the  part payment instead of insisting  or demanding  the entire dues as per the bill?  This would  further make it clear that there is practice  of permitting  the customers to make part payments towards the bill amount.

     The further contention of opposite party is that the itemized bills were issued as per the demand made by the complainant but she refused to accept it.  In support of this contention the copy of POD  of the  cover  is produced by them.  According to complainant she has neither received any itemized bills nor she refused  the cover issued by opposite party.  In order to prove  that the complainant has refused the itemized bills sent by cover no evidence is produced by the opposite party. Ext.B1 is only a copy of the  receipt.  It is not a conclusive proof to show that complainant has refused the itemized bill.

    To sum up the non issuance of itemized bill before  the due date of succeeding  month’s bill even after request by a customer is a deficiency in service on the  part of opposite party.  It is a violation of Telecommunication Tariff order 2004 which provides as follows.

       ‘’   Subscribers have the right to know and verify the charges for long distance calls levied by the service providers. The prepaid customers have the facility to ascertain this on a call-by-call basis without any extra charge.         However the billed customers i.e. the postpaid customers of several access providers are presently charged extra for obtaining this information. The Authority after careful consideration of the provisions relating to billing in the license agreements for basic, Cellular, Unified Access, NLD and ILD licenses and also the consumer interest in general, has decided to mandate that the bills raised by service providers should contain sufficient information required by the customer; and also that in case any customer requests for itemized bills relating to long distance calls it shall be provided free of charge.

6.    This amendment order to TTO incorporates the decision of the Authority that if any postpaid customer requests for itemized bill relating to long distance calls, it should be provided free of charge by the access providers. ‘’

        Therefore the opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant for the loss and hardships sustained to him.  The opposite party taken a terse contention in the version that complainant is not maintainable and the Forum has no jurisdiction to deal with this complaint. But no materials are placed or no argument is advanced to substantiate this contention How the complaint is not  maintainable.  Therefore the complaint is maintainable before the Forum and we find deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.

       The complaint is therefore allowed and opposite party is directed to reconnect the mobile connection No.9947666000 of the complainant with a further direction to issue itemized detailed bill every month as envisaged under the tariff order 2004.  Opposite party also directed to pay a compensation of `3000/- and a cost of ` 2000/- .  Time for the compliance of this order is limited to 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.  Had the opposite party got a case that it is the Idea Cellular Ltd, Cochin is liable to pay the amount, then after paying the said amount to the complainant they can recover the same from Idea Cellular Ltd, Cochin through appropriate legal proceedings.

Exts:

A1 toA9- Idea bills

A10-disconnection notice

A11&A12- reminder for payments

A13-cash receipt

A14-2/8/10-  copy of lawyer notice

A15-copy of cash bill

A16-copy of cash receipt

A17-2/8/10- lawyer notice

A18-2/2/11- lawyer notice

B1-copy of receipt

B2- copy of application form

B3- copy of idea bills

B4—do-

B5 & B5 series- idea bills

B6- returned cover

PW1-K.K.Babu- Husband of complainant

DW1- Naseer.C- opposite party

MEMBER                                MEMBER                                    PRESIDENT

eva