Date of Filing : 26/10/2016
Order No. 13 dt. 22/12/2017
Fact of the case according to the complainant in brief is that complainant succeeded to obtain a cable connection having Client Id no. Ds0063695775 from Manthan Broad Band Service, 6 G. C. Avenue, Kolkata-700013(o.p.1) through Mr Abhijit Mullick, 22, Ghosh Lane, Kolkata-100006(op-2) after submitting application in prescribed form for new cable connection on payment of Rs.1,200/- for set top box and Rs.315/- for monthly recharge. But o.p.2 did not issue any money receipt against such payments in spite of repeated request by the complainant. Again o.p.2 did not make cable connection to complainant during the period from February, 2015 to September, 2015. However subsequently o.p. had issued statement about the charges for set top box and monthly charges for the initial month but without any seal or signature. Disgusting with the service of the o.ps. complainant at first issued the legal notice and thereafter lodged this complaint at this Forum praying for direction upon the o.p. to pay Rs.1480/- with interest @12% p.a. along with compensation of Rs.35,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.15,000/-.
O.p.2 contested the case by submitting w/v and op-1 remained ex-parte. In the w/v Ld lawyer of the op-2 argued that the complainant never raised any issue with regards to the service provided by the o.p.2 rather it was the refusal of the complainant not to pay subscription charges for cabled TV services which prompted O.p.2 to disconnect the signals of complainant and after disconnection of services the o.p.2 also made refund of the amount to complainant. The complainant never raised any issue with regards to the receipts with the o.p.2 and it was only after the disconnection of services by o.p.2 the issues have been raised by the complainant which is clearly an afterthought of the complainant. The complainant has failed to show where is the deficiency in service on the part of o.p.2. Rather it is the complainant who has regularly failed to pay the monthly subscription dues and being aggrieved by such action the o.p.2 was constrained to disconnect the services of the complainant. The Hon’ble Commission may be pleased to dismiss the present complaint and direct the complainant to pay to o.p.2 a sum of Rs.25,000/- as cost of litigation and for mental harassment.
On the basis of the pleadings of the respective parties following points are to be decided :-
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get any relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons :-
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that complainant was permitted to have cable connection from M/s Manthan Broad Band Service (op-1) through Mr Abhijit Mullick(op-2) on payment of Rs.1,200/- for set top box and Rs.315/- for monthly recharge. But o.p.2 did not issue any money receipt against such payments in spite of repeated request by the complainant. Complainant paid monthly payment for the subsequent month but op-2 disconnect the cable connection. O.P.2 did not make cable connection to complainant during the period upto September, 2015. However subsequently o.p. had issued statement about the charges for set top box and monthly charges for the initial month but without any seal or signature there on. After verification of the documents of eligibility of the complainant regarding cable connection o.p.2 asked the complainant to pay refundable amount of Rs.1,200/- against installation of set top box and to pay Rs.315/- as monthly charge for the month. Complainant paid the amount without having any receipt. Against the demand of receipt by the complainant o.p. responded in the negative and refused to connect the cable connection upto the month of September, 2015. Thus, o.ps had paid no heed to the call of the complainant regarding service connection, issuing of receipts against payment or refund of the money paid. OP-2 has pointed out that for installation of set top box o.p.2 has to bear the cost of cable wire by an amount of Rs.200/- which needs to be accounted for.
With the above points in view we hold that there was deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps. Therefore , complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for. Thus, all points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, it is ordered,
that the CC No.474/2016 is allowed on contest against o.p-2 and ex parte against op-1 with cost. O.ps are jointly and/or severally directed to pay Rs.1290/-(Rupees one thousand two hundred ninety) only to the complainant along with compensation of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs. 500/-(Rupees five hundred) only within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
