DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

C.C. No.200/2021   

QUORUM:

Order By: Shri S.S. Malhotra (President)

JUDGMENT

By this judgment the Commission would dispose off the present complaint filed by the Complainant against OP alleging deficiency in selling a defective Sim and then in not  activating the same despite having received the consideration by OPs. 

1. Brief facts as stated by the complainant in the complaint are that he is the subscriber of the Jio Sim having Mobile No.7011839831, and on 21.09.2018 he visited the store of OP2 to obtain an international connection Sim Card and made a payment of Rs.1101/- to the OP.  OP issued a Sim Card (Green Colour) vide ICCID 89918660400057704757 TKD dated 30.02.2017 along with receipt dated 21.09.2018 in lieu of the old Jio Sim of the complainant and he was assured by OP2 that aforesaid Sim Card will be activated in two hours.  The Complainant accordingly left for Canada but when he reached there the Sim did not work/ activateed and complainant made several complaints and requests to the OP’s number regarding non-activation and ultimately he asked his brother to visit the store of OP at Krishna Nagar, Delhi for getting the said Sim activated but the same was not activated despite complaints and even his brother was asked to get the said mobile number of complainant recharged for a  sum of Rs.149/- to activate but despite, paying Rs.149/- the said international connection Sim Card issued by OP2 was not activated and the OP even assured the complainant that said Sim Card would be activated through their representative in Canada but no representative/ partner of OP came to the complainant for its activation during the period of stay at abroad i.e. from 22.09.2018 to 22.10.2018 and in these circumstances the complainant had to remain without telephone number and was not able to talk to his parents, family and was not able to attend business and financial transactions.  After coming back to Delhi he approached the store of OP where one Mr. Nitin informed him that said international connection Sim Card was defective and asked the complainant to visit store of OP at Geeta Colony where although another Sim Card vide ICICID was issued to the complainant but he could not enjoy the benefits of the Sim Card which was taken by him against consideration and against recharge and as such he filed the present complaint thereby claiming Rs.1,250/- along with compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- and litigation charges of Rs.15,000/-. 
2. The Complainant had earlier filed a complaint before DCDRC (East) which was withdrawn with liberty and as such he has filed the present complaint again.  The limitation is also explained which is covered in terms of Suo-Moto direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court issued from time to time by extending limitation during Covid period and it is prayed that complaint be allowed. 
3. The OPs were served and one Sh. Neeraj Bansal advocate appeared for OP on 06.12.2021.  Subsequently, one Sh. Tej Ram has received the copy/ Paper Book for Sh. Kapil Sharma Advocate for OP whose Vakalatnama is on record.  However, OP1 was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 07.07.2023.  It is also observed that subsequently one Sh. Kamlesh Anand Advocate appeared for OP2 and demanded copy of the complaint but it was informed that the OP2 i.e. Reliance Retail Ltd. has already appeared through Sh. Kapil Sharma Advocate and all such facts were brought to in the knowledge of Ld. Counsel for OP2. 
4. The Commission has heard the arguments and perused the record. 
5.     The main contention of the complainant is that he purchased an international Sim Card for the purpose of visiting abroad and the same was not activated by OPs as per the assurance to the complainant and even the same could not be activated despite paying another amount of Rs.149/- by his brother at the time when complainant himself was out of India which deprived the complainant to have talks with the family members and also w.r.t. financial transactions.  The OP despite having served has not filed the reply and as such there is no version of the OP before the Commission which can be appreciated. The version of the complainant has gone unrebutted. Therefore, the complainant is able to prove deficiency on the part of OPs in selling the defective Sim Card, and then not activating the same which is a part of services to be provided by the OPs.  However, the contention of the complainant that he could not do the financial transaction is concerned, the same fact is not proved by way of any document but the fact as far as he would not have been able to talk to his family members can be appreciated.  Therefore, complainant has been able to prove that there was deficiency on the part of OPs in selling a defective product and then not giving proper services and therefore OP is deficient in its service and the Commission is passing the judgment as follows:

• OPs would jointly and severally return Rs.1250/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till actual payment.    
• OPs would jointly and severally also pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation to the complainant including litigation charges. 

This order be complied with within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order failing which the OP would pay interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till date of realization on the entire amount of Rs.6,250/-.      

Copy of the order be supplied/sent to the parties free of cost as per rules.

File be consigned to Record Room.    

Announced on 16.01.2024.