BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PRESENT:
SHRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER SMT. S.K. SREELA : MEMBER O.P. No. 414/2003 Filed on 17/10/2003 Dated: 31..10..2009 Complainant: Joseph George, Kodickal Chempilakathu, KVP Paruthippara, Muttada-P.O., Thiruvananthapuram.
(By Adv. E.V. Philip)
Opposite parties:
The Reliance Infocom Services, Reliance Industries Ltd., Makerchambers IV, 222 Nariman Point, Bombay-21, represented by Managing Director. Reliance Industries Ltd., 2nd Floor, AVS Building, Near Padma Junction, M.G. Road, Kochi, represented by Manager. Reliance Web World, Skyline Melody, opp. AIR, DPI Junction, Vazhuthacaud, Thiruvananthapuram, represented by Manager.
(By Adv. N. Padmini)
This O.P having been heard on 08..10..2009, the Forum on 31..10..2009 delivered the following:
ORDER
SMT. S.K.SREELA, MEMBER:
The case of the complainant is as follows: The complainant subscribed to the Reliance India Mobile Phone service conducted by the 1st opposite party under the Dhirubhai Ambani Pioneer offer scheme by paying an amount of Rs.3,000/- and issued 12 post dated cheques for Rs.1,800/- each to the 1st opposite party through their authorised agents, the 3rd opposite party. Under the abovesaid scheme the opposite parties offered a sleak feature rich digital mobile phone hand set (MRP Rs.10,500/-) absolutely free to a Dhirubhari Ambani Pioneer Club Member, complainant paid the Club membership fee of Rs.3,000/- and obtained the free handset. As the service given by the opposite parties were not reliable, satisfactory and good, the complainant decided to terminate the service. On termination of service 2nd opposite party compelled to return the absolutely free handset and on 2/5/2003 the complainant returned the hand set and terminated the service. Thereon complainant demanded to return Rs.3,000/- deducting any service charge and also return the post dated cheques. Inspite of repeated demands the opposite parties did not return either the deposit money or the post dated cheques. As there was no positive response for the opposite parties, this complaint has been filed. 2. The 3rd opposite party has filed version for and on behalf of all the opposite parties contending as follows: That the complaint is not maintainable. The payment of Rs.3,000/- and 12 post dated cheques for Rs.1,800/- are admitted, but the said amount of Rs. 3,000/- which has been paid towards Club membership fee of Dhirubhai Ambani Pioneer Club is non-refundable. That the handset was given free for the members of the club but the ownership of the handset remains with the company. As per the agreement, the customer is duty bound to surrender the handset before termination. All the post dated cheques shall be returned once the dues are all cleared. The complainant has no genuine grievance and hence pray for dismissal of the complaint with compensatory costs.
3. Both parties have filed their affidavits. The documents produced by the complainant are marked as Exts. P1 to P4 and that of the opposite parties as Ext.D1. From the contentions made by the complainant, the following points are to be considered:
Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties? Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs prayed for in the complaint?
5. Points (i) & (ii): There is no dispute with regard to the fact that, the complainant had applied for a Reliance India Mobile Phone Service and he had paid Rs.3,000/- along with 12 post dated cheques for Rs.1,800/- each to the opposite parties. The complainant alleges that he terminated the service as the same was not satisfactory and reliable and on termination he was compelled to return the absolutely free handset. Hence the complainant prays for return of either the mobile handset or the deposit of Rs.3,000/- paid towards club membership. 6. The opposite parties, in their version, contend that as per clause 7(iii) of the agreement, the customer is duty bound to surrender the handset before termination. We have to consider whether the same is applicable herein. Ext.D1 is the customer Application Form. It has been signed by the complainant. As per it the complainant has agreed to abide by the terms and conditions provided overleaf of Ext.D1. Clause 7 (iii) of the Terms and Conditions reads as follows: “In the event of the Company terminating the Services to the subscriber due to any reason or the subscriber discontinuing the services of the company, the subscriber shall forthwith return the subscriber Equipment (handset) to Reliance Industries Limited. The Subscriber undertakes not to use the subscriber Equipment (handset) provided by Reliance Industries Limited to procure the telecom services of any other telecom service provider. The subscriber also undertakes not to do any modification, decompilation or reverse engineering of any software in the handset in any manner whatsoever. The subscriber recognises that he shall be liable for all consequences and/or penal actions for the breach of undertaking contained in this clause”. Moreover the brochure Ext.P4 reveals that one time club membership fee of Rs.3,000/- will not be returned. Furthermore it is stated that balance of refundable deposits after deducting any dues will be returned and not returning the handset will result in an extra charge. Exit year 1 – Rs.5,000/-, year 2 – Rs.3,000/-, year 3 – Rs.2,000/-. Hence whether any amount is due to the opposite parties from the complainant has to be looked into. As per Ext.P3, the period for which the amount of Rs.65/- has been billed is for a period from 01/04/2003 to 30/4/2003. The complainant admits that the service has been terminated on 2/5/2003. Hence during the period for which Ext.P3 has been issued, the complainant was in possession of the handset. So he is liable to pay that amount.
7. The brochure produced by the complainant is clear about the refunds and charges and Ext.D1 regarding the terms and conditions. It is a settled position, that when there is a specific term in the contract the parties are bound by the terms in the contract. In view of the above, we hold that the complainant is neither entitled to get back the handset from the opposite parties nor entitled for refund of Rs.3,000/- paid as membership fee. The complainant has failed to establish any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The opposite parties shall return the 12 post dated cheques after the clearing of all the dues by the complaint as per the terms and conditions.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No order as to costs.
A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, on this the 31st day of October, 2009.
S.K. SREELA, MEMBER.
G. SIVAPRASAD PRESIDENT.
BEENA KUMARI.A, ad. MEMBER. O.P.No. 414/2003 APPENDIX
I. Complainant's witness : NIL II. Complainant's documents: P1 : Copy of Advocate notice dated 17/7/2003 issued to opposite party. P2 : Reply notice dated 12/9/2003 issued by the counsel for opposite party. P3 : Bill statement No./100073950003 dated 1/5/2003 of Tel.No.0471-3101689 P4 : Brochure of Reliance Mobile
III. Opposite parties' witness : NIL Opposite parties' documents :
D1 : Photocopy of customer application form dated 7/2/2003.
PRESIDENT.
ad.
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PRESENT:
SHRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER SMT. S.K. SREELA : MEMBER O.P. No. 414/2003 Filed on 17/10/2003 Dated: 31..10..2009 Complainant: Joseph George, Kodickal Chempilakathu, KVP Paruthippara, Muttada-P.O., Thiruvananthapuram.
(By Adv. E.V. Philip)
Opposite parties:
The Reliance Infocom Services, Reliance Industries Ltd., Makerchambers IV, 222 Nariman Point, Bombay-21, represented by Managing Director. Reliance Industries Ltd., 2nd Floor, AVS Building, Near Padma Junction, M.G. Road, Kochi, represented by Manager. Reliance Web World, Skyline Melody, opp. AIR, DPI Junction, Vazhuthacaud, Thiruvananthapuram, represented by Manager.
(By Adv. N. Padmini)
This O.P having been heard on 08..10..2009, the Forum on 31..10..2009 delivered the following:
ORDER
SMT. S.K.SREELA, MEMBER:
The case of the complainant is as follows: The complainant subscribed to the Reliance India Mobile Phone service conducted by the 1st opposite party under the Dhirubhai Ambani Pioneer offer scheme by paying an amount of Rs.3,000/- and issued 12 post dated cheques for Rs.1,800/- each to the 1st opposite party through their authorised agents, the 3rd opposite party. Under the abovesaid scheme the opposite parties offered a sleak feature rich digital mobile phone hand set (MRP Rs.10,500/-) absolutely free to a Dhirubhari Ambani Pioneer Club Member, complainant paid the Club membership fee of Rs.3,000/- and obtained the free handset. As the service given by the opposite parties were not reliable, satisfactory and good, the complainant decided to terminate the service. On termination of service 2nd opposite party compelled to return the absolutely free handset and on 2/5/2003 the complainant returned the hand set and terminated the service. Thereon complainant demanded to return Rs.3,000/- deducting any service charge and also return the post dated cheques. Inspite of repeated demands the opposite parties did not return either the deposit money or the post dated cheques. As there was no positive response for the opposite parties, this complaint has been filed. 2. The 3rd opposite party has filed version for and on behalf of all the opposite parties contending as follows: That the complaint is not maintainable. The payment of Rs.3,000/- and 12 post dated cheques for Rs.1,800/- are admitted, but the said amount of Rs. 3,000/- which has been paid towards Club membership fee of Dhirubhai Ambani Pioneer Club is non-refundable. That the handset was given free for the members of the club but the ownership of the handset remains with the company. As per the agreement, the customer is duty bound to surrender the handset before termination. All the post dated cheques shall be returned once the dues are all cleared. The complainant has no genuine grievance and hence pray for dismissal of the complaint with compensatory costs.
3. Both parties have filed their affidavits. The documents produced by the complainant are marked as Exts. P1 to P4 and that of the opposite parties as Ext.D1. From the contentions made by the complainant, the following points are to be considered:
Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties? Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs prayed for in the complaint?
5. Points (i) & (ii): There is no dispute with regard to the fact that, the complainant had applied for a Reliance India Mobile Phone Service and he had paid Rs.3,000/- along with 12 post dated cheques for Rs.1,800/- each to the opposite parties. The complainant alleges that he terminated the service as the same was not satisfactory and reliable and on termination he was compelled to return the absolutely free handset. Hence the complainant prays for return of either the mobile handset or the deposit of Rs.3,000/- paid towards club membership. 6. The opposite parties, in their version, contend that as per clause 7(iii) of the agreement, the customer is duty bound to surrender the handset before termination. We have to consider whether the same is applicable herein. Ext.D1 is the customer Application Form. It has been signed by the complainant. As per it the complainant has agreed to abide by the terms and conditions provided overleaf of Ext.D1. Clause 7 (iii) of the Terms and Conditions reads as follows: “In the event of the Company terminating the Services to the subscriber due to any reason or the subscriber discontinuing the services of the company, the subscriber shall forthwith return the subscriber Equipment (handset) to Reliance Industries Limited. The Subscriber undertakes not to use the subscriber Equipment (handset) provided by Reliance Industries Limited to procure the telecom services of any other telecom service provider. The subscriber also undertakes not to do any modification, decompilation or reverse engineering of any software in the handset in any manner whatsoever. The subscriber recognises that he shall be liable for all consequences and/or penal actions for the breach of undertaking contained in this clause”. Moreover the brochure Ext.P4 reveals that one time club membership fee of Rs.3,000/- will not be returned. Furthermore it is stated that balance of refundable deposits after deducting any dues will be returned and not returning the handset will result in an extra charge. Exit year 1 – Rs.5,000/-, year 2 – Rs.3,000/-, year 3 – Rs.2,000/-. Hence whether any amount is due to the opposite parties from the complainant has to be looked into. As per Ext.P3, the period for which the amount of Rs.65/- has been billed is for a period from 01/04/2003 to 30/4/2003. The complainant admits that the service has been terminated on 2/5/2003. Hence during the period for which Ext.P3 has been issued, the complainant was in possession of the handset. So he is liable to pay that amount.
7. The brochure produced by the complainant is clear about the refunds and charges and Ext.D1 regarding the terms and conditions. It is a settled position, that when there is a specific term in the contract the parties are bound by the terms in the contract. In view of the above, we hold that the complainant is neither entitled to get back the handset from the opposite parties nor entitled for refund of Rs.3,000/- paid as membership fee. The complainant has failed to establish any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The opposite parties shall return the 12 post dated cheques after the clearing of all the dues by the complaint as per the terms and conditions.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No order as to costs.
A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, on this the 31st day of October, 2009.
S.K. SREELA, MEMBER.
G. SIVAPRASAD PRESIDENT.
BEENA KUMARI.A, ad. MEMBER. O.P.No. 414/2003 APPENDIX
I. Complainant's witness : NIL II. Complainant's documents: P1 : Copy of Advocate notice dated 17/7/2003 issued to opposite party. P2 : Reply notice dated 12/9/2003 issued by the counsel for opposite party. P3 : Bill statement No./100073950003 dated 1/5/2003 of Tel.No.0471-3101689 P4 : Brochure of Reliance Mobile
III. Opposite parties' witness : NIL Opposite parties' documents :
D1 : Photocopy of customer application form dated 7/2/2003.
PRESIDENT.
......................Smt. Beena Kumari. A
......................Smt. S.K.Sreela
......................Sri G. Sivaprasad | |
