In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No.422/2012.
1) Smt. Usha Devi Kothari,
Prop. of R.K. International,
7, Pollock Street, P.S. Hare Street, Kolkata-1 and
51, Jatindra Mohan Avenue,
P.S. Shyampukur, Kolkata-5. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) M/s Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
Through the Manager, Ballygunge Branch,
1, Ashutosh Choudhury Avenue,
P.S. Ballygunge, Kolkata-19
2) M/s Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
Regd. office at 36-38A, Nariman Bhawan,
227, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. ---------- Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member
Order No. 8 Dated 23-08-2013.
The case of the complainant in short is that complainant is proprietress of M/s R.K. International, a sole proprietorship concerned and the complainant holds and maintaining a current account being no.03252090004273 with o.p. no.1.
Complainant being allowed by various services, including “Auto Payment” service of o.p. has opened a bank account with o.p. no.1 alike Electronic Clearance System (ECS) and in pursuance of the aforesaid service of ‘Auto Payment’ the complainant’s telephone and electricity bills were being defrayed and disbursed by o.p. no.1 from time to time and corresponding amounts debited to complainant’s account.
Complainant is a subscriber of a mobile telephone no.9339544072 whose service provider is M/s Reliance Communications Ltd. The said telephone caters to the complainant’s needs of aforesaid business.
O.ps. most negligently failed and ignored to disburse and defrayed the mobile telephone bill for the period 3.6.12 to 2.7.12 despite there being sufficient balance avail in complainant account as a result of which service to her above mobile connection was suspended / discontinued since 8.8.12.
Complainant been unaware about the reason for such discontinuation of the service to her mobile phone contacted Reliance Communication Ltd. where she was humiliated and mocked at for having not paid the bill. Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.
O.ps. did not contest this case by filing w/v and matter was heard ex parte against the o.ps.
Decision with reasons:
We have gone through the pleadings of the complainant, evidence and documents in particular and on perusal of the entire materials on record and having regards to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court published in AIR 2010 SC 90 in the Supreme Court of India, Civil Appeal No.7687 of 2004 decided on 1.9.09 between General Manager, Telecom vs. M. Krishnan and Anr., we are of the views that the instant case cannot be entertained by this Forum and as such, the same is liable to be rejected.
Hence, ordered,
That the case is dismissed ex parte without cost against the o.ps.
