PRESENT
Complainant Absent.
Opponent Ex-parte.
ORDER
(Per- Mr. S. D. MADAKE, Hon’ble President
1. The present complainant who is a senior citizen filed the complaint against M/s Bharati Airtel Ltd. as per section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for deficiency in service.
2. The complaint is filed on 11.1.2012. The notice was issued to opposite party after admitting the complaint on 18.3.2013. The opposite party failed to appear though notice was served and sufficient time was given for appearance and file say. The forum passed order to proceed ex-parte on 29.5.2014. The complainant has solemnly affirmed the contents of the complaint.
3. The learned Advocate for complainant Nagesh L. Mendon was present for hearing on 1.8.216 and 22.9.2016. We have perused complaint. The correspondence between complainant with opposite party, legal notice sent by opposite party dated 5.9.2012 to complainant and reply given to the notice dated 27.9.2012.
4. The substance of the grievance of complainant is that, he purchased HCL Model ME Tablet AE 7 A1 having No.71111000115. He went to Airtel gallery on 3.3.2012 and submitted duly filed form supported by relevant documents for the purpose of activating internet. He paid charges for data card E 1731 and Airtel mobile No. 9987473345. He was informed by Mr. Shahabag of Airtel Co. that work was done as per requirement.
5. The complainant noticed that said internet could not be activated. He went to HCL office and requested for finding the fault and after inspection for few days, he was informed that data-card E 1731 was not compatible with HCL tablet model M.E. Tablet-AE 7-AI Mr. shahabaj insisted that data card E-1731 is compatible but tablet is not working.
6. The complainant requested opposite party to replace the data card with one which could be compatible with above model of HCL. He requested for refund. Opposite party declined both these offers. He requested and offered for surrender , however the offer was rejected on the ground that before the term it cannot be surrendered.
7. He requested for surrender on the ground that being retired pereson he will not be able to pay monthly charges. He was told that “ our recovery people know how to recover from you”. He stated this is unfair trade practice, cheating and threatening.
8. The allegations made in the complaint have gone unchallenged. The correspondence between the complainant and opposite party show that complainant repeatedly requested for proper service or either replace data card 1731 or refund amount.
9. The failure of opposite party to render service as per request of complainant amounts to deficiency in service. The act of opposite party denying service on the ground that HCL tablet is not working is unjustified.
10. The act of opponent stating that recovery agents know how to recover money is unfair trade practice. The complainant requested for surrender to which he was warned with the above threatening words naturally to cause alarm to him.
11. The complainant who is senior citizen was subjected to mental agony. He is entitle for reasonable compensation. We quantify the amount of Rs.7,500/- as compensation. He is entitle for refund of the amount as well as cost. He has not produced on record receipt of payment.
12. In the result, We pass the following order.
ORDER
1. RBT Complaint No. 443/2012 is partly allowed.
2. The BHARATI AIRTEL LTD. is directed to pay Rs.7,500/- as compensation for mental agony to complainant with interest @ 9 %
p.a. from the date of filing the complaint i.e. 11.10.2012 till realization.
3. The opposite party is directed to pay cost of Rs.5,000/- to complainant.
4. The opposite party is directed to refund the amount paid by complainant
for the purpose of internet.
5. Copy of this order be sent to the both parties.
