BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI Dated this the 26th day of September, 2008
Present: SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER
C.C No.92/2008 Between Complainant : V.M.Sidhik, Vettickal House, Perumpillichira P.O, Thodupuzha - 685 605, Idukki District. And Opposite Parties : 1. M/s.Joy Brothers, Choorappuzha Towers, Thodupuzha. 2. M/s. RSC Electronics, Nerar St.Sebastian's High School, Thodupuzha P.O. 3. M/s.Dish TV India Limited, Nabeel Plaza, 7th Floor, No.39/1039, M.G Road, Pallimukku, Cochin.
O R D E R SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)
On 23.10.2006, the complainant had purchased a Home Customer Premises Equipment having a free of rent for 3 month from the Ist opposite party by paying an amount of Rs.3,300/-. It is a free package with DTH antenna. After elapsing the 3 months period, the complainant approached to the Ist opposite party for payment of rent Rs.75/-. With a direction of the Ist opposite party the complainant remitted the rent to the 2nd opposite party. The very next month the complainant again approached the 2nd opposite party for the rent remission. At that time the 2nd opposite party stated that the rent has increased from Rs.75/- to Rs.100/-. And also the lumpsum payment is only upto 6 months. The complainant agreed and paid Rs.600/- on 6.03.2007. After that he paid rent upto 7.02.2008 on 8.09.2007. After 6 months the complainant received an SMS from the opposite party that the complainant should pay the rent before 7.03.2008. The complainant approached the 2nd opposite party for payment. At that time also rent increased from Rs.100/- to Rs.150/-. Complainant expressed his unwillingness to the opposite party. They told to the complainant that if the rent of Rs.150/- per month is not paid in time, the connection of the complainant will be disconnected. The opposite party stated that, it is due to the tie up of Dish TV with Sun TV, rent is increased and the complainant is offered to provide 16 more channels also. The complainant is not satisfied with the act of the opposite party. Alleging deficiency in service against the opposite parties in their service, the complaint has been filed. 2. Inspite of notice from this Forum, the opposite parties did not appear or file any version. So they are called exparte.
3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?
4. The complainant is examined as PW1 and Ext.P1(series) marked on the side of the complainant.
5. The POINT :- The complainant purchased a Home Customer Premises Equipment from the Ist opposite party. The opposite party received Rs.3,300/- for the same. Ext.P1(a) is the copy of Receipt dated 23.10.2006 for Rs.3,300/- for purchase of Dish TV DTH. Ext.P1(b) is the receipt for Rs.75/- issued by the 2nd opposite party. The complainant was regularly paying the bill. The opposite party increased the monthly subscription fee in every month. Increasing of the rent was not announced to the complainant before purchase of the machinery. But the opposite party announced that there will be an increase of some channels which is provided with the new scheme. The complainant replied his unwillingness to co-operate with this. So they threatened the complainant that the connection will be disconnected and the complainant must approach Delhi where the company is constituted for contesting case against the opposite party. First upon the complainant's freedom in purchasing a dish TV with DTH antenna and the right of selection are prohibited by the action of opposite party. Secondly the opposite party unilaterally increased the rent rate twice without the permission or pre-agreement with the complainant. So we find deficiency in service of the opposite parties. The complainant do not want to continue with the scheme of opposite party. The opposite party never appeared for contesing the case. The remedy available is to give back the alleged instrument and receive the amount paid for the same.
In the result, the petition is allowed. The Ist opposite party is directed to take back the alleged set up box and give Rs.3,300/- to the complainant and the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.1,500/- as cost and compensation to the complainant within one month of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest from the date of default. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 26th day of September, 2008
Sd/- SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)
Sd/- I agree SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)
Sd/- I agree SMT.SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER)
APPENDIX
Depositions On the side of Complainant : PW1 - V.M.Sidhik On the side of Opposite Parties Nil Exhibits On the side of Complainant Ext.P1(a) - Photocopy of Receipt dated 23.10.2006 for Rs.3,300/- Ext.P1(b) - Photocopy of Receipt for Rs.75/- issued by the 2nd opposite party Ext.P1(c) - Photocopy of Receipt for Rs.600/- Ext.P1(d) - Photocopy of Receipt for Rs.562/- Ext.P1(e) - Photocopy of Receipt for Rs.150/- Ext.P1(f) - Photocopy of Receipt for Rs.150/- Ext.P1(g) - Photocopy of Receipt for Rs.150/- On the side of Opposite parties : Nil
| 
