Complainant : In person
Opposite Party : Ex-Parte
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
Per :- Mr. J. L. Deshpande, President Place : Bandra
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
::::: JUDGMENT :::::
Facts giving rise to this complaint may be stated, in brief, as follows :
The Opposite party is Telecom Company. The Opposite party had offered Simcard having no.9892586672 to the Complainant. The Complainant received Simcard on or about 12.09.2008, for which the Opposite party collected Rs.99/- towards Simcard charges. The Complainant was informed that the Simcard would be activated within next five days.
2 It is the case of the Complainant that when the Complainant contacted the Opposite party, he was informed that the Simcard has already been activated and it was in use. The Complainant, further, received information from the call centre of the Opposite party that already calls were made from the Simcard. The Complainant requested to block the Simcard on 22.09.2008.
3 It is further case of the Complainant that the Complainant received bill on 24.09.2008 for sum of Rs.373.47paise. The Complainant lodged complaint about this bill. Again the Complainant visited Airtel Gallery at Andheri-Kurla Road and he was told that the matter was under investigation and the Complainant, further received information that the Simcard, which was activated in the name of the Complainant was not the same which was issued to the Complainant. The Complainant informed the Opposite party that he would not pay the bill since he was not using the Simcard.
4 The Complainant, further, received bill, on 02.11.2008 for dated, 24.10.2008 for sum of Rs.2,629.70paise. The Complainant again visited Airtel Gallery and he was assured that it won’t happen again.
5 Despite this, the Complainant received bill, dated, 24.11.2008 for sum of Rs.2,959.69paise. Further, the Complainant received notice, dated, 12.12.2008 from the Opposite party for legal proceeding for non-payment of dues. The Complainant then filed present complaint seeking declaration that the Opposite party is guilty of deficiency in service to quash the bill and compensation in sum of Rs.5,00,000/-.
6 Responding to the notice, the Opposite party appeared and filed application for dismissal of the complaint on the ground that in view of the Judgment rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of General Manager, Telecom Versus M.Krishnan & Anrs., Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction to decide this dispute. The Complainant filed rejoinder to the same. This Forum dismissed the application of the present Opposite party and other Opposite parties in such complaints vide common order, dated, 20.09.2010. The Opposite party then filed application to inform this Forum that he has filed Revision Application before Hon’ble State Commission. Thereafter, the Opposite party did not appear.
7 The Opposite party failed to file written statement / version to the complaint as well as affidavit of evidence. Consequently, the Opposite party was set Ex-parte.
8 We have gone through the complaint, affidavit and documents and written argument filed by the Complainant. We have heard learned advocate of the Complainant.
9 We take the points that arise for our consideration and record our findings there-against as below :-
Nos. | Points | Findings |
1 | Whether the Complainant has proved that the Opposite party is guilty of deficiency in service ? | Yes |
2 | Whether the Complainant is entitled to reliefs sought in the complaint ? | Yes |
3 | What order ? | Complaint is partly allowed. |
POINTS FOR FINDINGS :-
10 Along with the complaint, the Complainant has filed affidavit and has affirmed that contents of the complaint are correct. The Complainant has produced copy of the bills, dated, 24.09.2008 for sum of Rs.373/-, 24.10.2008 for sum of Rs.2,629/- and bill dated, 24.11.2008 for sum of Rs.2,959/-. It is the case of the Complainant that Simcard issued to the Complainant appearing last digit nos.2719 was never activated and he could not make phone calls from the said Simcard. However, the Complainant continued to receive the bills from the Opposite party for the said Simcard. From the averments made in the complaint, it is further seen that the Complainant had gone twice to the office of the Opposite party and appraised the Officer of the Opposite party about the grievance of the Complainant. The Complainant was assured that his Simcard was blocked. Still then the Complainant received the bill for sum of Rs.2,629/-. Not only that but the Complainant received notice, dated, 12.12.2008 for legal action for non-payments of dues.
11 The Opposite party has not appeared after their objection vis-à-vis jurisdiction of this Forum was turned down. They have not field written version of defence. The Opposite party has not offered any explanation regarding the grievance expressed by the Complainant. Thus, the averments in the complaint have remained unrebutted. From the material on the record, we find that the Opposite party failed to activate the Simcard of the Complainant but at the same time, the Complainant received the bills regarding the same Simcard which he had never used for making a call. This clearly amounts to deficiency in service.
12 The Complainant was served with three demand bills without there being use of the Simcard. In addition to that no response was given to his request to block the Simcard. In view of this, we find that it would be appropriate to give direction to the Opposite party not to recover the amount under the three bills issued to the Complainants’.
13 The Complainant has sought compensation from the Opposite party for sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. That claim appears to be excessive and exorbitant having regard to the hardship and inconvenience suffered by the Complainant. We find that compensation inclusive of costs of proceeding Rs.15,000/- would serve the ends of the justice.
With this, we proceed to pass the following order.
::::: ORDER :::::
(1) Complaint is partly allowed.
(2) It is hereby declared that the Opposite party is guilty of deficiency in service by sending wrong bills to the Complainant and the Opposite party is hereby directed not to make demand of the amount mentioned in the legal notice, dated, 06.12.2008.
(3) The Opposite party is further, directed to pay compensation in sum of Rs.15,000/- to the Complainant within eight weeks from the receipt of copy of the order. In the event of failure pay the amount within stipulated period, the Opposite party shall pay interest @9% from the date of expiry of the period of eight weeks in making of the payment.
(4) Certified copies of this order be furnished to both the parties, free of costs, as per rule.
