A.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
AT HYDERABAD.
F.A. 141/2008 against C.D. 607/2006, Dist. Forum-III, Hyderabad.
Between:
I. Sai Baba, S/o. Late Ramachandraiah
Age: 47 years, Advocate
R/o. 1-1-193/4/3
Opp. Lane of Allahabad Bank
Chikkadpally, Hyderabad-20. *** Appellant/
Complainant
And
1. Reliance Infocom Ltd.
C/o. Terence Fibres (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Thane, Belapur Road,
Kopar Khairane,
Navi Mumbai-400 709
2. Reliance Infocom Ltd.
Regional Head Office: 6-3-1090/B
Munavar Chambers, 4th Floor
Adjacent to Lake Shore Towers
Rajbhavan Road, Hyderabad. *** Respondents/ Opposite Parties.
Counsel for the Appellant: M/s. V.G.S. Rao
Counsel for the Respondent: M/s. M. Srinivas.
CORAM:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D. APPA RAO, PRESIDENT
&
SMT. M. SHREESHA, MEMBER
MONDAY, THIS THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND TEN
Oral Order: (Per Hon’ble Justice D. Appa Rao, President)
*****
1) Appellant is unsuccessful complainant.
2) The case of the complainant in brief is that he is an advocate practising in various courts. He took cell phone from the respondent in the month of March, 2003 and has been paying the bill regularly. While so, when the respondent had deactivated his phone in the month of April, 2005 illegally he filed C.D. 419/2005 wherein costs were awarded and the appeal is pending
before the State Commission in F.A. No. 1690/2005. An interim direction has been given to restore the connection. However again it has disconnected the phone from 19.8.2006. He changed the plan for post-paid incoming free for life time by paying Rs. 991/- on 23.1.2006 wherein he will be entitled to incoming calls free for the life time. He has been paying the bills regularly. At any rate incoming calls cannot be de-activated. If there are any arrears it should recover by following proper procedure and claim before an appropriate forum. He sent his reconciliation statement on 22.1.2005 showing that he was not in arrears, however, the respondent did not give any reply. Due to disconnection he was unable to contact his clients, advocates and unable to see the cause list of High Court through internet by using the phone, and loss of prestige and reputation in the society, client, colleagues and friends besides suffering mental agony and loss of income. Therefore assailing that the disconnection is against the principles of natural justice he filed the complaint to declare the action of respondent as illegal and arbitrary besides claiming compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs towards mental agony, loss of prestige etc.
3) The respondents resisted the case. While denying each and every allegation made in the complaint it alleged that the Dist. Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Clause 9 (1) of the Customer Application Form (CAF) prescribes the jurisdiction of courts at Mumbai. It alleged that when the complainant was in arrears in payment his phone was disconnected for which he filed C.D No. 419/2005 which was disposed of by holding that the complainant was not entitled to any compensation except costs of Rs. 500/-. The State Commission did not restrain the complainant from paying the dues. As per bill dt. 1.8.2006 he had to pay Rs. 7,647/- as on 24.8.2006, Rs. 7,800/- as per bill dt. 1.9.2006 and Rs. 8,167/- as per bill dt. 1.10.2006. The complainant intends to enjoy the service provided without paying the dues under the garb of interim orders. He had paid Rs. 222/- only for voice charges withholding the legitimate charges payable to it. He cannot take advantage of his own wrong. He has been making payment according to his own whims and fancies without recoursing to the bills. The assertion that the incoming calls cannot be deactivated even if there are arrears and it has to recover the arrears in a court of law is without any basis. The alleged reconciliation statement is self-serving. They are factually incorrect.
They had restored the phone though the complainant was in huge arrears of Rs. 7,800/- as on 1.9.2006. The allegation that due to de-activation he had lost the prestige and dignity in the society is misconceived and illusory. The claim of the complainant is highly exorbitant, and unreasonable, and therefore it prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
4) The complainant in proof of his case filed his affidavit evidence and got Exs. A1 to A6 marked, while the respondents filed Exs. B1 to B3.
5) The Dist. Forum after considering the evidence placed on record opined that the complainant was in arrears evidenced from Exs. B2 & B3 bills and had paid only Rs. 232/- against bill dt. 1.8.2006 for Rs. 7,647/-. He was in arrears and therefore there was no deficiency in service on the part of respondent in disconnecting the service and dismissed the complaint.
6) Aggrieved by the said decision, the complainant preferred the appeal contending that the Dist. Forum did not appreciate either facts or law in correct perspective. It ought to have seen that he was not in arrears in payment of bills. The reconciliation statement send by him was not disputed and therefore it had to be taken as correct. Since he sustained loss of prestige, reputation and income, he was entitled to compensation.
7) The point that arises for consideration is whether the order of the Dist. Forum is vitiated by mis-appreciation of fact or law?
8) It is an undisputed fact that the complainant is a subscriber of cell phone facility of the respondent. It is not in dispute that the respondent has issued bill dt. 1.8.2006 for Rs. 7,647/-, bill dt. 1.9.2006 for Rs. 7,800/- and bill dt. 1.10.2006 for Rs. 8,167/-. The complainant alleges that he subscribed for post-paid incoming free plan for life time by paying Rs. 991/- on 23.1.2006 wherein he will be entitled to incoming calls for life time, and therefore his phone cannot be de-activated, even if there are arrears.
9) It may be stated herein that he filed reconciliation statement marked as Ex. A5. He could not explain as to how he arrived at the amounts. He made his own assessment without explaining as to how he assessed. He sent Ex. A4 notice wherein he has given a tabular statement mentioning the bills amounts. He pointed out five mistakes in the bills. He arrived the difference of Rs. 670.40 according to him paid in excess in December, 2003. The respondent filed bills marked as Exs. B2 & B3. During the hearing of the appeal the respondents filed Ex. B4 to B8. When Ex. B4 statement of account filed mentioning the date, reference number, activity, debit, credit and amount balance the complainant could not pointed out the mistakes in billing. We may state unless the complainant prove ex-facie the billing was wrong, it cannot be said that the billing was wrong. He did not dispute the phone calls made by him. The Dist. Forum after considering Exs. A1 & A2 besides Exs. B2 & B2 opined that the complainant was in arrears of Rs. 8,167/- as on 1.10.2006. It is not the case of the complainant that he has paid the amount. He could not prove that he need not pay the amounts that were shown in Ex. B4. We do not see any deficiency in service on the part of respondent. The contention of the complainant that the respondent cannot de-activate even if he fails to pay the amount and the only recourse to the respondent is to collect the amount by recoursing to court proceedings has no basis. The respondent cannot be driven to court to recover the arrears. We do not see how it could be said that he suffered mental agony etc. when he did not pay the arrears. We do not see any mis-appreciation of fact or law by the Dist. Forum in this regard. We do not see any merits in the appeal.
10) In the result the appeal is dismissed. No costs.
1) _______________________________
PRESIDENT
2) ________________________________
MEMBER
*pnr Dt. 13. 12. 2010.
“UP LOAD – O.K.”
