Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/09/2013

Madhu Desikan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Matrix Cellular (International)Services Pvt Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

M/sSudharshana Sundar.

02 Jan 2019

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 21.12.2012

                                                                          Date of Order : 02.01.2019

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                : MEMBER-I

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP., : MEMBER-II

 

C.C. No.09/2013

DATED THIS WEDNESDAY THE 02^ND DAY OF JANUARY 2019

                                 

Madhu Desikan,

S/o. Late V.Desikan,

No.1/4, Balasubramanium Street,

Mylapore,

Chennai – 600 004.                                                        .. Complainant.                                                   

 

    ..Versus..

 

1. The Managing Director,

Matrix Cellular (International) Services Pvt. Ltd.,

No.4/605, First Main Road,

Nehru Nagar,

Kottivakkam,

Chennai – 600 041.

 

2. Matrix Cellular (International) Services Pvt. Ltd.,

HO:2, Khollar Farms,

Mandi Road,

New Delhi – 110 030.                                              ..  Opposite parties.

          

Counsel for complainant                        :  M/s. Sudharshana Sunder &

                                                                   another

Counsel for the opposite parties 1 & 2 :  M/s. V. Samuthira Vijayan &

                                                                   another

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to refund the excess amount of Rs.5,900/- paid by the complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he entered into an agreement with the opposite parties on 02.06.2012 when he was travelling from Chennai to Dubai for availing Data Connection.   The complainant was also issued a Sim card with Sim No.8997103310043201654 etc.   The complainant submits that the complainant was given Matrix Tariff sheet which shows the offers given by the opposite party under the plan code DUARP0911s12 gives a total savings on the Matrix Plan of 90.89%.   The complainant submits that as soon as he landed in Dubai, the complainant contacted the local mobile service DU to surf the internet.  As per the Matrix Tariff Sheet, the (GPRS) General Packed Radio Service which is pre-activated in the Sim, the charges are upto 20 pounds per MB or as applicable by network.  The Data package offered by DU was 5 MB in case of mobile light mobile usage, the monthly fee was AED 10 i.e. approximately Rs.1,500/- per month.  The complainant also, after verifying the details subscribed the network and started using the GPRS.   The complainant submits that the opposite parties issued notice dated:08.09.2012 demanding to pay a sum of Rs.22,619/- being the amount payable by the complainant towards the usage of mobile telephone service.   But the opposite party has deducted a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the credit card of the complainant as early as 15.02.2012.  The complainant also has not used the mobile service to the tune of Rs.22,619/-.  The complainant submits that as per the Customer Agreement Form it reads as follows: “This agreement is to be read to the terms and conditions, Customer Undertaking and the Tariff Plan attached hereto which are part and parcel of the complete agreement between Matrix Cellular International Services Pvt. Ltd. and the customer”, as per the Matrix Tariff Sheet given along with the said Customer Agreement Form “GPRS (General Packed Radio Service) is pre activated on your SIM cards and charges are upto $20/MB or as applicable by network”.   The complainant submits that the opposite party has deducted a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the credit card.  The complainant used the Sim card only for Rs.4,100/- as per the plan.   The complainant submits that since the opposite party has deducted a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the credit of the complainant, the opposite party is liable to refund a sum of Rs.5900/-.  The act of the opposite parties caused great mental agony.  Hence, this complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite parties is as follows:

The opposite parties specifically deny each and every allegations made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.     The opposite parties state that they are providing specific sim cards business across the countries to enable the Indian travellers for proper contact and effective communications etc.  The  complainant availed the Sim card service of the opposite parties and availed the service of the opposite party by using the Sim card.  The opposite parties state that M/s. Matrix Cellular International Services Pvt. Ltd. which is a Private Limited Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 dealing international mobile rental services which was rightly availed by the complainant and used in accordance with the contract specifying the call rates.  The opposite parties state that the complainant entered into a contract with the 2^nd opposite party by signing the customer agreement which shows the tariff plan and total savings of 90.89% was achieved when Matrix plan was compared to International roaming charges.    The opposite parties state that they have no knowledge regarding the discussions and negotiations which the complainant had with the mobile service DU.   The complainant has used only matrix cellular Pvt. Ltd. and not of DU service.  The complainant also has not raised anything in respect of such connection except the terms and conditions agreed and signed.   The opposite parties state that on 15.06.2012, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- by way of Credit Card since the complainant has not paid any amount by way of usage of Sim card.  The opposite party issued notice dated:08.09.2012 asking the complainant to pay the outstanding amount of Rs.22,690/-.   The opposite parties state that they were well within their  rights to claim the amount from the complainant as charges for the services availed by him.    The opposite parties state that the complainant used the mobile services of the opposite parties for several days during June 2012 and full details of such usage have been provided in the bill dated:27.06.2012 sent to the complainant.  Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.    Hence, this complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.    To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is filed and no documents filed and marked on the side of the opposite parties.

4.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of a sum of Rs.5,900/- alleged to be paid in excess as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost as prayed for?

5.      On point:-

Both parties filed their respective written arguments.   Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.   Admittedly, the complainant entered into an agreement as per Ex.A1 dated:02.06.2012 for availing Data Connection when he was travelling from Chennai to Dubai.   The complainant was also issued a Sim card with Sim No.8997103310043201654 etc. Further the contention of the complainant is that the complainant was given Matrix Tariff sheet which shows the offers given by the opposite party under the plan code DUARP0911s12 gives a total savings of 90.89%.   Ex.A2 is the Matrix Sheet showing conditions.   Ex.A3 is the Matrix Tariff Sheet shows the matrix plan and international roaming etc showing the total savings on the matrix plan of 90.89%.  Further the contention of the complainant is that as soon as he landed in Dubai, the complainant contacted the local mobile service DU to surf the internet.  As per the Matrix Tariff Sheet, the GPRS (General Packed Radio Service) which is pre-activated in the Sim, the charges are upto 20 pounds per MB or as applicable by network.  The Data package offered by DU was 5 MB in case of mobile light mobile usage as per Ex.A4.  i.e AED 10 i.e. approximately Rs.1,500/- per month.  The complainant also, after verifying the details subscribed the network and started using the GPRS.   But on a careful perusal of Ex.A3, Matrix Tariff Sheet, the call rates particulars which reads as follows:

 Call rates

Particulars	Matrix Plan	International Roaming
Advance Rental for the year	Rs.999/-	NA
Incoming calls, per minute	FREE	AED 8.62
Local outgoing calls, per minute	AED 0.50	AED 3.75
International calls to India (off peak time), per minute	AED 1.89	AED 3.75
International calls to India (peak time), per minute	AED 2.40	AED 13.87
Local SMS	AED 0.40	AED 1.12
International SMS	AED 0.90	AED 1.12

 

proves that there are variations from the contention of the complainant.   Further the contention of the complainant is that the opposite party issued notice as per Ex.A6 dated:08.09.2012 demanding to pay a sum of Rs.22,619/- being the amount payable by the complainant towards the usage of mobile telephone service.   But the opposite party has deducted a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the credit card of the complainant as early as 15.02.2012.  The complainant also has not used the mobile service to the tune of Rs.22,619/-.   But on a careful perusal of Ex.A5, it is very clear that the complainant has utilised the service to the tune of Rs.32,619.40 including tax after deducting a sum of Rs.10,000/- and the balance due is Rs.22,619/-.   The call details issued by the opposite party was not denied. 

6.     Further the contention of the complainant is that as per the conditions in Ex.A1 & Ex.A2, “This agreement is to be read to the terms and conditions, Customer Undertaking and the Tariff Plan attached hereto which are part and parcel of the complete agreement between Matrix Cellular International Services Pvt. Ltd. and the customer”, as per the Matrix Tariff Sheet given along with the said Customer Agreement Form “GPRS (General Packed Radio Service) is pre activated on your SIM cards and charges are upto $20/MB or as applicable by network”.  But as per Ex.A3, the call rates  differs from such conditions.  Further the contention of the complainant is that the opposite party has deducted a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the credit card.  The complainant used the Sim card only for Rs.4,100/- as per the plan.    But the complainant has not filed any record.  Further the contention of the complainant is that since the opposite party has deducted a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the credit of the complainant, the opposite party is liable to refund a sum of Rs.5900/-.  But on a careful perusal of records, without filing any document to prove the usage of Sim for Rs.4,100/- claiming a sum of Rs.5,900/- is unsustainable.

7.     The contention of the opposite party is that the opposite parties are providing specific sim cards business across the countries to enable the Indian travellers for proper contact and effective communications etc.  Admittely, the complainant availed the Sim card service of the opposite party as per Ex.A1 & Ex.A2 and availed the service of the opposite party by using the Sim card as per Ex.A5.   Further the contention of the opposite party is that M/s. Matrix Cellular International Services Pvt. Ltd. which is a Private Limited Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 dealing international mobile rental services was rightly availed by the complainant and used in accordance with the contract specifying the call rates as per Ex.A3.  Further the contention of the opposite party is that the complainant entered into a contract with the 2^nd opposite party by signing the customer agreement which shows the tariff plan and total savings of 90.89% was achieved when Matrix plan was compared to International roaming charges.    Further the contention of the opposite party is that they have no knowledge regarding the discussions and negotiations which the complainant had with the mobile service DU.   The complainant has used only matrix cellular Pvt. Ltd. and not of DU service.  The complainant also has not raised anything in respect of such connection except the terms and conditions agreed and signed.   Further the contention of the opposite party is that on 15.06.2012, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- by way of Credit Card since the complainant has not paid any amount by way of usage of Sim card, the opposite party issued notice as per Ex.A6.   The complainant without any evidence claiming refund of a sum of Rs.5,900/- is imaginary as he had used the Sim Card service only for Rs.4,100/-.   The opposite parties sent Ex.A6, legal notice claiming a sum of Rs.22,619/-.  On the other hand, the opposite party issued Ex.A5, bill in details of the claim and  the balance due on the part of the complainant.   Hence, there is no deficiency or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.   Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that this complaint has to be dismissed.

In the result, this complaint is dismissed.   No costs.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 02^nd day of January 2019. 

 

MEMBER-I                           MEMBER-II                     PRESIDENT

 

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.A1	02.06.2012	Copy of Customer Agreement Form
Ex.A2		Copy of important instructions
Ex.A3		Copy of Tariff Sheet
Ex.A4		Copy of Data Bundles from du
Ex.A5	27.06.2012	Copy of bill
Ex.A6	08.09.2012	Copy of legal notice from the opposite party
Ex.A7	25.09.2012	Copy of reply notice by the complainant
Ex.A8	03.10.2012	Copy of acknowledgement

 

OPPOSITE  PARTIES 1 & 2 SIDE DOCUMENTS:-  NIL

 

 

MEMBER-I                           MEMBER-II                     PRESIDENT