DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSSAL FORUM

WEST TRIPURA : AGARTALA

 

 

CASE NO:  CC – 131  of   2017

 

 

Sri Sushanta Chakraborty,

S/O- Sri Dilip Chakraborty,

East Pratapgarh, P.S. East Agartala,

P.O. Pratapgarh, West Tripura- 799004. .......…...Complainant.

 

 

          -VERSUS-

 

1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.,

Represented by its Managing Director,

Bharat Sanchar Bhavan,

Harish Chandra Mathur Lane,

Janapath Road, Janapath,

New Delhi- 110001.

 

2. General Manager, 

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.,

Kaman Chowmuhani, Agartala,

Tripura(West )- 799001. ........ Opposite Parties.

 

 

 

__________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI A. PAL,

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

 DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

SRI U. DAS

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

C o u n s e l

 

For the Complainant : Sri Amritlal Saha,

  Sri Kajal Nandi,

  Advocates.

 

For the O.Ps : Mrs. Kakali Deb,

  Miss Ananya Deb,

  Advocates.

 

 

JUDGMENT   DELIVERED   ON:   27.06.2018.

 

J U D G M E N T

This case arises on the petition filed by one Dilip Chakraborty U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. Petitioner's case in short is that he was the subscriber of post paid connection taken from the BSNL. On 22nd October, 2017 he went to Moscow,  Russia and taken international roaming facility in his mobile phone. However, when he went to Russia he was given local sim which was used by the complainant most of the time. But BSNL sending message informing that maximum limit of the bill Rs.12,000/- already crossed on 18.10.17. So mobile connection was disconnected from 18.10.17 to 27.10.17. On his return to India BSNL issued the bill on 05.11.17 for Rs.53,770/- for the period from 01.10.17 to 31.10.17. BSNL could not provide him the details of the bill. It was non correct bill and petitioner suffered because of the deficiency of service. He prayed for cancellation of the telephone bill and also Rs.1 lac as compensation. 

 

2. O.P. BSNL appeared, filed written statement denying the claim. It is stated that bill for Rs.53,770/- including roaming charges was issued to the customer and on application details of call records including international roaming charges along with phone numbers provided to the customer. There was no deficiency of service and actual bill amount was claimed. Therefore, O.P. prayed for dismissal of this claim. 

 

3. On the basis of the contention raised by both the parties following points cropped up for determination:

(I) Whether the O.P. BSNL claimed excessive amount from the petitioner for international roaming call and other outgoing call?

(II) Whether there was deficiency of service by the O.P. and petitioner is entitled to get compensation?

 

4. Petitioner produced the letters to Senior Manager(BSNL), original bill, copy of invitation letter, marked as Exhibit- 1 Series. 

 

5. Petitioner also produced the statement on affidavit of one witness i.e., the petitioner himself.

 

6. O.P. BSNL on the other hand produced the bill, copy of call list details, complaint letter by the complainant, letter by the complainant, reply to the complaint, copy of high usage report. 

 

7. O.P. also produced the statement on affidavit of one witness, Assistant General Manager, BSNL. 

 

8. We have gone through the evidence, documentary and oral evidence and decided to come to the definite findings on the above points.

 

Findings and decision:

9. Petitioner in his statement on affidavit repeated the complaint. Petitioner stated that he paid Rs.5,000/- as advance and it was recorded that his credit limit should be Rs.10,000/- only during his visit outside India for the purpose of international roaming. He received the SMS from BSNL and it was informed that maximum credit  limit Rs.12,000/- crossed. So mobile connection was disconnected on 18.10.17. But thereafter bill given for Rs.53,770/-. Petitioner in his cross examination admitted  that on 26.10.17 the line was restored. 

 

10. O.P. Assistant General Manager, Utpal Chowdhuri in his statement on affidavit stated that as per standard proceeding when the customer crosses his credit limit phone call was made from cellular mobile to inform the customer regarding exceeding credit limit and the amount of outstanding bill due to use of international roaming facility. He also stated that as per system record both the incoming and outgoing call facility was disconnected by the system on 19.10.17. From this evidence it is clear that when the credit limit crossed then the incoming and outgoing call facility is disconnected. According to the petitioner and O.P. credit limit was Rs.12,000/-. From this we can assume that up to 18.10.17 the call charges exceeded Rs.12,000/-. 

 

11. We have gone through the call records and bill. Total bill amount is written Rs.53,770/-. From the call record it is found that Rs.12,000/- exceeded before 18.10.17. Cost of one call on 16.10.17 was Rs.2316/-. Another call Rs.1389/- on 17.10.17 and Rs.1389/- on the same day. From the call list it is found that on the same day amount of Rs.2316/- was charged for another call. Rs.1389/- for another call on the same day. There is a repetition. On 17.10.17 another call rate written Rs.2779/-. When it crossed the credit limit thereafter also on 18.10.17 the call list shows that another call cost was Rs.5095/-. On the same day another call was Rs.8801/-. According to BSNL as per system when the credit limit cross automatically the service will be stopped but here the service continued and abnormal bill was charged on 2 dates particularly on 17.10.17 and 18.10.17. From that date the service line was disconnected. Maximum credit limit petitioner is under compulsion to pay and that is as per petitioner and O.P. cost Rs.12,000/-. From the call list it is found that after disconnection again on 26.10.17 the connection was restored. It is also admitted by O.P. so, up to the date of disconnection 19.10.17 petitioner is to pay Rs.12,000/- the maximum limit and not more than that. And thereafter as per call list charges of the call is to be paid by the petitioner. The excessive amount demanded by the O.P. and excess of maximum credit limit cannot be allowed.

 

12. We therefore, direct the O.P. to receive the amount as per maximum credit limit given by them not more than that. O.P. claimed the amount as per their call list generated by the computer. In providing service they had no fault but they did not stop the connection when the credit limit crossed in time. This is deficiency of service by BSNL and BSNL will have to pay compensation for that amounting to Rs.5,000/-. We direct the O.P. BSNL to receive the maximum credit limit up to date of disconnection i.e., 19.10.17 and thereafter calculate the bill amount cost as per call list from 26.10.17 when line restored and give petitioner Rs.5,000/- as compensation for deficiency of service. Both the points are decided accordingly. 

 

13. In view of our above findings over the points, we direct the O.P. BSNL to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation to the petitioner and receive the call charges up to the maximum credit limit given by them to the petitioner amounting to Rs.12,000/- till 19.10.17 and thereafter call charge as per call list from 26.10.17. Payment is to be made within 2 (two) months.

 

 

    Announced.

 

 

 

 

SRI A. PAL

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL FORUM,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

 

SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH,

MEMBER,

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL FORUM, 

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA SRI  U. DAS

MEMBER,

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL FORUM, 

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA