DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016

Case No.432/2012

Sh. Nishant Raj Goel,

R/o E-870, Ground Floor,

EPPDP Colony,  Chitranjan Park,

New Delhi                                                                      ….Complainant

Versus

The Managing Director

Matrix Cellular International Services Pvt. Ltd.

7 Khullar Farms, Mandi Road,

Mehrauli, New Delhi-110030                                  ….Opposite Party

                                                Date of Institution        : 30.08.12            Date of Order      : 07.05.19

Coram:

Sh. A.S. Yadav, President

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

ORDER

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

1. Brief facts as stated by the complainant  are:
   1. The complainant, Nishant Raj Goel took services of OP Company i.e. Matrix Cellular International Services Pvt. Ltd. for international call roaming services between 22.05.12 to 29.05.12. The complainant  averred that he had filled up the Customer Agreement Form and had given his Credit Card number for the payment of calls made.
   2. It is averred that the complainant was conscious enough to switch off his data roaming services so that any kind of internet or GPRS usage could not be made and no amount unnecessarily be deducted for the same. On returning back from Singapore the complainant received a bill of Rs.24,107.58p from OP company. The complainant was shocked to see the bill as it had been generated against data transfer also which was not being used at all.  The complainant wrote an e-mail stating that he had switched off data roaming services and had only received email on 28^th May in the afternoon i.e. on his return from Singapore. He reiterated that he had not received or sent a single message during this period hence the data charges levied on him were incorrect. Further the complainant stated that he had mentioned in that email that his credit card number which was given in the said Agreement Form was given for security purpose only and not for day to day deduction for usage.
   3. Thereafter the complainant wrote various emails to OP company explaining his stance and requesting them that as he had not used any data roaming service of phone during his 6 days stay in Singapore he cannot be charged for the same by OP.  Despite considerable communications to  OP when his grievances were not redressed the complainant  approached this Forum with the prayer for issuing direction to OP to refund already deducted excess amount of Rs.21,425.63p for data transfer usage and direction for OP to pay Rs.20,000/- towards compensation and litigation expenses.
2. OP resisted the complaint inter-alia stating that OP after knowing the need of the complainant, explained various plans/packages of the Sim Card which a person can use during the foreign tour/travel etc. After having understood the various plans of packages the complainant chose package according to his need. OP submits that the complainant out of his sweet will preferred to bear call and data charges through the Credit Card through an explicit authorization in favour of the OP. OP submits that the complainant  himself has given his consent to withdraw amount of the bill raised out of his Credit Card. OP further submits that as regards data charges it was very clear from the tariff plan which was signed by the complainant. The relevant extract from the contract is reproduced below:    

“GPRS is pre activated on our SIM cards and charges are up to 21 SGD/MB or as applicable by the network.”

1. It is next submitted that OP after receiving e-mails from the complainant verified the bill and usage of the complainant  from the Billing Department and reverted back accordingly.
2. OP further submits that the complainant had used the data services within the foreign network service provider of a particular country and OP is only here to provide the international SIM Card. OP has raised the bills as per the usage/data sent by foreign network services provider of the particular country. Therefore, OP claiming not be deficient in service prayed for direction to the complainant to pay the litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-. Further it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed with exemplary cost as the complainant has concealed the material fact and is trying to mislead the Forum.   

3. No rejoinder to the written statement has been filed on behalf of the complainant. 
4. Complainant has filed evidence by way of affidavit. On the other hand, affidavit of Sh. Chand Shakar, has been filed on behalf of OP.
5. Both the parties have filed their respective written arguments. 
6. We have heard the oral arguments on behalf of the complainant.  No one appeared on behalf of the OP to advance oral arguments despite affording opportunity to him. 
7. We have also gone through the material placed on record.
8. Admittedly the complainant took SIM Card services of OP while on his trip to Singapore. On returning back to India he was shocked to receive a bill of Rs.24,107/-. Complainant  raised two main issues regarding the deficient services of OP. First issue is that of OP deducting the bill amount using his Credit Card and the second issue is regarding the internet services being used. As per the complainant, he had switched off his data roaming services. He had not received or sent any email during his 6 days stay in Singapore. So the data charges levied in his bill were incorrect. OP as regard both the issues has placed relevant clause from the Customer Agreement Form which was duly consented and signed by the complainant. The relevant portion from the agreement is reproduced as under:

“I authorize Matrix Cellular International Services Pvt. Ltd. to charge any telephone call and/or related expenses to my above mentioned card. These expenses are to be charged to my nominated credit card and the sole discretion for Matrix Cellular International Services Pvt. Ltd. This instruction is valid on an ongoing basis, I agree to advice Matrix Cellular International Services Pvt. Ltd. that if my nominated credit card account is cancelled substituted or not renewed in such cases, I agree to provide alternate payment instruction as specified by Matrix Cellular International Services Pvt. Ltd.”

From the extract given above, it is clear that the complainant had consented to usage of his Credit Card by OP for payment purposes. Further OP in its revert mail on 12.06.12 has stated as:

“Data was not turned off on the Blackberry phone. Hence data was charged due to auto upload and download.

We have got the bills verified with our bill department and found the bill genuine and valid.

As regard the second issue, it is again mentioned in the Customer Agreement Form that GPRS is pre-activated on the Sim Card. Further on perusal of the bill annexed with the complaint which we mark as Mark ‘A’ for the sake of identification shows that internet services were used.

9. From the facts stated above we find no reason to disbelieve the OP. The old adage ‘men may lie but documents do not’ comes to the rescue of OP, as the bill shows usage of date contrary to complainant’s version that he had switched off the data usage.
10. In light of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that complainant has failed to prove any deficiency or unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. Accordingly, we dismiss the complaint with no order as to costs.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations.Thereafter file be consigned to record room.   

Announced on 07.05.19