Date of Filing:13.08.2008<br /> Date of Order:22.01.2009<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2009<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1772 OF 2008<br /> <br /> <br /> M/s Navkar Collection,<br /> Represented by Sri. Jayanthilal,<br /> No.109, Lakshmi Complex,<br /> J.M. Road, Bangalore-560 060. Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd.,<br /> No.11/1 & 11/2, Maruti Infotech Center,<br /> Block ‘A’ West Wing, Koramangala,<br /> Airport Inner Road, Amarjyothi Layout,<br /> Domlur, Bangalore-560 071,<br /> Represented by its Managing Director. Opposite Party<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/Sec. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> The brief facts of the case are that, the complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.750/- with the opposite party and availed the telephone services with Local and STD facilities. Complainant never requested or opted to have ISD facilities to the telephone services. Complainant was getting monthly bills ranging for Rs.350/- to 700/- p.m and he has remitted bill amounts regularly and promptly. Complainant was shocked to receive bill for the period from 17/11/2007 to 16/12/2007 for a sum of Rs.13,693-44. The complainant was shocked to find that the opposite party has charged for international calls in fact complainant has not availed ISD facilities to his telephone. Complainant submits that some mischief or misuse of his telephone. He has lodged a complaint with the opposite party. Representatives of opposite party assured to look into the matter but even though six months lapsed nothing has been done by the opposite party to enquire and investigate the matter. The opposite party has deliberately disconnected the telephone service in the month of Februry-2008 without any notice. Opposite party caused legal notice. Complainant suitably replied to the notice. Opposite party raised unwarranted pre-litigation before Lok-Adalath. As per rules, opposite party has to demand additional deposit for ISD facility. There was no such request. Complainant has not made any additional deposit. Complainant is not liable to pay illegal amount claimed towards ISD calls. Therefore, the complainant submitted that the illegal bill be quashed and opposite party be directed to restore the telephone facility to the complainant and to award compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for mental agony and hardship. <br /> <br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite party. Opposite party put in appearance through Advocate and defense version filed denying the case of the complainant. The complainant has made ISD calls to the rest of the World-3 category destination i.e., countries like Nauru and Solomon Islands. Payments were not received. Therefore, opposite party disconnected the telephone connection. The opposite party submitted that complainant is bound to pay the ISD calls. Hence, requested to dismiss the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. Affidavit evidences are filed. Arguments are heard.<br /> <br /> 4. The points for consideration are:-<br /> 1. Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?<br /> <br /> 2. Whether the bill raised in respect of ISD calls is illegal?<br /> <br /> 3. Whether the complainant is entitled to the restoration of telephone connection?<br /> <br /> R E A S O N S<br /> 5. It is submitted that the complainant has taken telephone connection of opposite party by depositing of Rs.750/- as depositing amount. The complainant has availed telephone services with Local and STD facilities. It is the case of the complainant that he never requested or opted to have ISD facilities to his telephone services. The opposite party has produced Subscriber Enrolment Form of Broadband and Telephone Services. In this Form it is very clear that the complainant has taken Local and STD facilities only. He has marked Local and STD boxes. The ISD box has not been marked. Therefore, by the Subscriber Enrolment Form it is very clear that the complainant has not availed services of ISD. Admittedly, the complainant has not deposited the additional amount for availing services of ISD. The opposite party has taken Rs.750/- as deposit amount from the complainant for Local and STD facilities. If really ISD facility was given to the complainant in that case opposite party could have taken additional deposit amount. When the complainant has not taken ISD facility, the question of making ISD calls does not arise at all. The complainant cannot avail the service of ISD through his telephone. By looking into the bill and statement, it is very surprising that on 04/12/2007 itself there are 9 calls, again on 05/2/2007 there are 5 calls and on 08/12/2007 there are 2 calls of ISD. The clause made and shown appears to be fictitious telephone number. The opposite party submitted that calls were made of destination countries like Nauru and Solomon Islands. These countries appear to be fictitious. It is very strange and surprising that the complainant can make ISD calls to such countries and 9 calls were made on one day, such thing cannot be believed or acceptable at all. The bill raised by the opposite party towards ISD calls is wholly illegal and unwarranted. But company could have investigated and tried to find out the culprit who has misused the telephone number of the complainant. When the complainant had not at all taken ISD facility to his telephone connection, how can he make ISD calls. The total amount towards ISD calls as per the statement comes to Rs.11,880/-. This amount the complainant is not liable to pay out of Rs.13,693/-. The disconnection of the telephone by the opposite party for nonpayment of bill amount is unjustified and wholly illegal. The complainant is right in not depositing or paying the bill invoice dated 18/12/2007. The complainant is entitled for immediate reconnection and restoration of his telephone facility. The amount charged towards ISD calls is liable to be quashed since it is wholly illegal and unwarranted. A fraud had taken place and for that the complainant shall not be held responsible. It is for the opposite party to investigate the matter and book the culprit for misuse of telephone of the complainant. The complainant has suffered mental agony, hardship and inconvenience and loss in his business. He has spent time and energy and money to fight out the injustice. The complainant is right in approaching this Forum to get justice. The complainant has lodged complaint with the opposite party not once but four times. But nothing has been done to redress his grievances. Consumer Protection Act is a social and benevolent legislation to protect the better interest of the consumers. A consumer is the most important visitor in the premises of opposite party. He is not dependent on the opposite party on the other hand, the service provider is dependent on him. Customer was the boss in the past, is at present and will be in the future. Protection of customers’ interest is the most important aspect. The service provider shall not harass or cause inconvenience to the customers. On the facts and circumstances of the present case, the opposite party is completely wrong in raising ISD bill and demanding the payment of amount. This attitude on the part of the opposite party is not proper. The complainant is definitely entitled to be compensated for the mental agony and inconvenience caused to him. On the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just, fair and reasonable to grant Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the complainant apart from setting aside of amount charged towards ISD calls. The complainant is also entitled to reconnection and restoration of telephone services immediately. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:-<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 6. The complaint is allowed. The bill raised in respect of ISD calls to the extent of Rs.11,880/- is hereby set aside. The opposite party is directed to reconnect and restore telephone facility to the complainant vide customer ID No. 11037728, Telephone No.8041526816 immediately.<br /> 7. The opposite party is directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant for mental agony, harassment and inconvenience.<br /> 8. The complainant is also entitled for Rs.2,000/- towards costs of the present proceedings from the opposite party. <br /> 9. The opposite party is directed to comply the order within 30 days from the date of this order. <br /> 10. Send the copy of this order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> <br /> <br /> 11. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2009. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings. <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER <br /> Rhr., <br />