Orissa

Cuttak

CC/168/2014

Probodh Kumar Mohapatra - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director, Ortel Communication Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

R K Pattanaik

09 Dec 2016

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK.

                                                                                    C.C. No.168/2014

                Probodh Kumar Mohapatra,

   Sree Vihar Colony,Tulasipur,

     Cuttack-8.                                                                            … Complainant.

 

                Vrs.

 

1.         Managing Director,

Ortel Communication Ltd.,

                 At C-1,Chandrasekharpur

Near B.D.A. Colony,Bhubanenswar.

 

2.        Branch Head,

Sky View Home Cable,

Bharatia Tower(5^th Floor),

Badambadi,Cuttack.                                                              … Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:               Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,LL.B. President.

Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member (W).

 

Date of filing:   17.11.2014

Date of Order: 09.12.2016.

 

For the complainant:               Sri R.K.Pattnaik,Adv. & Associates.

For Opp.Parties.    :                  Sri S.Modi,Adv. & Associates.

 

 

Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,President.

                The complainant has lodged this complaint against the O.Ps alleging deficiency in service on their part and seeking appropriate relief from them in terms of his prayer in the complaint petition.

1. Case of the complainant stated in brief is that the complainant is a senior citizen and has approached the O.Ps to give cable connection to his building to watch T.V. programmes.  He submitted his application on 14.7.2014 to the O.Ps for such cable connection and was allotted with customer I.D No.825.  Annex-1 is the copy of the application form submitted by the complainant.  The O.Ps have also collected Rs.1999/- towards installation charges and Rs.99/- towards advance monthly subscription.  Annex-2 is the copy of the money receipt dt.15.9.2014 granted by the O.Ps.  On 7.2.2014 the agent of the O.Ps has also collected a sum of Rs.800/- from the complainant to provide Set Top box to him to watch the T.V. programme as per the direction of the Central Govt.  Annex-3 is the money receipt to this effect issued by the O.Ps.  Although the agent of the O.Ps promised to install Set Top box on 15.7.2014, it was not done.  Subsequently there was a disconnection of the cable connection to his premises towards end of July, 2014 although he had deposited Rs.290/- towards monthly subscription with O.Ps vide Annex-4.
2. There was disconnection of such cable connection to the premises of the complainant for about 3 months and no proper step was taken by the O.Ps in spite of the approach made by the complainant to restore such connection.  The O.Ps remained silent over the matter even after receipt of the dues from the complainant and he was deprived off watching the T.V programmes for the said period of 3 months without any fault on his part and it is tantamount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the O.Ps.
3. It is therefore, prayed that the O.Ps may be directed to refund the installation charges of Rs.1999/-, Set Top box charges of Rs.800/-, subscription fee for the month of July & August,14 of Rs.290/- together with compensation of Rs.10,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.5000/-.  All total Rs.18,089/- in the interest of justice.
4. The O.Ps in their written version have denied that there was deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part in any manner and that the case is not maintainable before this Forum.  There is also no cause of action to file this case.  It is also stated that provisions of cable T.V services are regulated by the Special Act i.e. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act,1997  and there is a separate mechanism provided under the said Act to deal with complaints with regard to disconnection of the cable connection etc. to the customer.  But the complainant instead of approaching the said authority has preferred to come to this Forum to redress his grievances and as such the complaint petition is not maintainable.  It is therefore prayed that the case is not maintainable against them and as such may be dismissed.
5. We have heard the learned advocates from both the sides and gone through the case record and the annexures filed by the complainant.  At the outset it is to be borne in mind that the learned advocate for the O.Ps while advancing his argument has not disputed the fact of receiving all charges by him as alleged in the complaint petition for providing cable connection and also disconnection of it to the premises of the complainant for about 3 months which deprived the complainant from watching the T.V programmes.  It is even admitted by the learned advocate for the O.Ps that in such a situation, the O.Ps are ready to refund all the charges paid by the complainant to them but not the compensation or cost of litigation to him since such disconnection was not intentional but because of the introduction of the Set Top box which was mandatory as per the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, for enjoying the T.V. programme.  It is also admitted that they feel sorry for the alleged inconvenience caused to the complainant who is a senior citizen and an esteemed customer under them.
6. From the above it is quite clear that there was deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps which has caused undue harassment and mental agony to the complainant who is a senior citizen for about 3 months.  Hence it is ordered;

        ORDER

The prayer of the complainant is allowed on contest against the O.Ps.  They are directed to refund Rs.1999/- taken towards installation charges, Rs.800/- for providing Set Top box, Rs.290/- towards subscription fees for the month of July & August,2014 to the complainant on his surrendering the cable connection.  The O.Ps in the facts and circumstances of the case are further directed to pay compensation of Rs.3000/- and litigation cost of Rs.2000/- to the complainant.  This order shall take effect after expiry of 45 days of receipt of the copy of this order.

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble President in the Open Court on this the 9^th     day of December, 2016 under the seal and signature of this Forum.

                                                                                                                                                  

    (   Sri D.C.Barik )

                                                                                                                     President.

                                                             

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             (Smt. Sarmistha Nath)

                           Member(W)