Delhi

North

CC/280/2024

NAMAN SHARMA - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LTD. BEARING CIN L74899HR1995PLC095967 - Opp.Party(s)

16 May 2024

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (North District)

[Govt. of NCT of Delhi]

Ground Floor, Court Annexe -2 Building, Tis Hazari Court Complex, Delhi- 110054

 

Consumer Complaint No.280/2024

In the matter of

Naman Sharma

S/o Shri Anil Sharma

R/o H No. D-II/1, Court Lane

Raj Niwas Mark, Civil Lines

Delhi- 110054                                   …                Complainant

 

Versus

 

M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd.

Regd. Office:

Airtel Centre, Plot No. 16,

Udyog Vihar, Phase IV,

Gurgaon, Haryana – 122 015

Corporate Office:

Bharti Crescent, 1, Nelson Mandela Road

Vasant Kunj, Phase-II

New Delhi - 110 070                …                Opposite Party No. 1

 

Appellate Authority for Delhi NCR,

Bharti Airtel Ltd.

Through Appointed Official Sh Ankur Singh

C/o Airtel Centre, Plot No. 16,

Udyog Vihar, Phase IV,

Gurgaon, Haryana – 122 015   …               Opposite Party No. 2

 

ORDER

16.05.2024

Present: Complainant in person

Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar

1. We have heard the argument of Complainant in person previously on admissibility of the complainant. The Complainant has raised multiple issues against M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd. in this complaint. OP-1 is the mobile service provider M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd. and OP-2 is its Appellate Authority. We suggested Ld. Advocate for the Complainant on the date of argument to withdraw this complaint and to file separate complaint for separate issues, but he refused to withdraw the complaint to file separate complainants. Hence, we have to pass an order in this matter.
2. Briefly stated, the Complainant is aggrieved with the final bill of Rs. 2.36 issued against his mobile number 98******68 by OP-1, when the final bill was allegedly issued by OP-1 and paid by the Complainant prior to porting of his mobile connection to a different service provider. Second grievance of the Complainant is with respect to alleged deficiency of service in providing mobile and broadband connectivity between August 2023 and February 2024. Third grievance of the Complainant is with respect to alleged unfair trade practice by allegedly introducing conditions for “unbundling” at the time of seeking disconnection.
3. All these three allegations against the OPs are different cause of action although all these three atre related to same mobile connection. It is settled principle that filing of a common complaint against different different cause of action will not only create confusion, but will also waste the judicial time of this Commission. Hon’ble National Commission in a number of cases has taken a view that the Complainant is required to file separate complaint for different cause of action/ different issues. In Jatinder Kaur vs Jaiprakash Associates [Consumer Case No. 1095 Of 2017, Decided on May 5, 2017], Hon’ble National Commission held that the complainants cannot be allowed to join their distinct causes of action even if the said causes of action are against the same opposite party. Hon’ble National Commission also opined that even otherwise there is no provision in the Consumer Protection Act for joinder of two distinct causes of action against the same service provider.
4.  Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of the judgment of Hon’ble National Commission in Jatinder Kaur case (supra), we are of the opinion that the Complainant has to file different complainants with respect to his distinct separate claims against the OPs herein. Therefore we dismiss the complaint at admission stage itself with liberty to the Complainant to file separate complaints for different issues involved before forum of appropriate jurisdiction, if so advised.
5. Needless to say that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and if the Complainant files separate complaints, the same shall be decided on its own merits without being influenced by any of the observations in this order.
6. Office is directed to supply the copy of this order to the Complainant as per rules. Office is also directed to return all original documents filed by the Complainant, after keeping certified copies of the same in the record. Thereafter, file be consigned to the record room.
7. Ordered accordingly.

 

 

 

___________________________

Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar, President

 

 

 

___________________________

Ashwani Kumar Mehta, Member

 

 

 

___________________________

Harpreet Kaur Charya, Member