Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/330/2016

P.V.Kalyanasundaram - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Matrix Cellular (International) Services P Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

P.Anitha , G.Rajkumar

10 Aug 2022

ORDER

Date of Complaint Filed : 15.09.2016

Date of Reservation      : 21.07.2022

Date of Order               : 10.08.2022

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                           : PRESIDENT

                       THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,           :  MEMBER  I 

                       THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,   : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.330 /2016

WEDNESDAY, THE 10^th DAY OF AUGUST 2022

P.V. Kalyanasundaram,

No. 53, Coastal Road,

Kalashetra Colony,

Besant Nagar,

Chennai-600 090.                                                                                                                                                          ... Complainant                         

 

..Vs..

M/s. Matrix Cellular (International)

Services Private Limited,

Rep. by its Managing Director,

7, Khullar Farms, Mandi Road,

Mehrauli, New Delhi-110 030.

 

Also at

"SESHASAAI",

2^nd Floor, No-4/606,

First Main Road,

Nehru Nagar,

Kottivakkam,

Chennai – 600 041.                                                                                                                                                  ...  Opposite Party

 

******

Counsel for the Complainant          : M/s. R.Anitha

Counsel for the Opposite Party       : M/s. V.Samuthira Vijayan

 

        On perusal of records and after having heard the oral arguments of the counsel for Complainant and the Counsel for Opposite Party, we delivered the following:

 

ORDER

Pronounced by Member-I, Thiru.T.R.Sivakumhar, B.A., B.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the Complainant as compensation towards monetary loss, hardship, mental agony, trauma, stress, physical strain, pain, pressure caused to the Complainant along with cost.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

      The Opposite Party claims to be a leading provider of international telecom solutions and services to Indians travelling abroad. The service offered by the Opp. Party includes International SIM card for cellular/mobile phones, Internet Packs for Smart phones, Laptops, iPads/Tablets, International Trave Insurance and Forex Cards. He is an advocate practicing in the Madras High Court and has a standing of over 30 years at the Bar and has earned good reputation among his clients and his colleagues. The Opposite Party had extensively marketed itself as a leading provider of international telecom service provider to connect every international traveller with convenient and cost effective solutions. The Complainant believing the tall claims made by the Opposite Party to be true and bonafide, believing in the claim about the award winning service, the Complainant decided to avail the services of the Opposite Party for his trip overseas during October, 2014. He had planned to visit Japan, China and Hong Kong on a holiday with his family and approached the Opposite Party for availing its telecom services. On 06.10.2014, representatives of the Opposite Party visited the Complainant's residence in connection with his request for availing the services of the Opposite Party. He was provided with separate cyclostyled tariff sheets pertaining to the tariff applicable in Japan, China and Hong Kong but the tariff sheet did not specify the date on which the rates are effective for implementation of the same. He was informed by one of the representatives that the tariff was the same as provided in the cyclostyled tariff sheet. He provided necessary details for the Customer Agreement Form with Sale Reference No. T1000870805, for availing a SIM card to be used during his stay in Japan. He was provided with a SIM card bearing No. 8981200213310173646 with Mobile No. 09028056332, vide a Challan bearing No. 6402377 with Tariff Code JP3001451. He also paid a Security Deposit of a sum of Rs. 100/- under Receipt No. R-48171/2014-2015 dated 06.10.2014. He received the confirmation email dated 06.10.2014 in respect of the subscription, providing a brief note on the connection related details and as per the said email dated 06.10.2014, the rental charges were Rs. 300/- for the entire billing cycle and the actual usage charges will be as per Tariff Code JP3001451. He left for his trip and reached Japan in the evening on 08.10.2014. He received an email dated 11.10.2014 from the Opposite Party, around 11 AM, stating that his unbilled usage was Rs.77,310/-. He was shocked to read the email, because he had used his mobile very sparingly, had called Chennai number twice or thrice only and furthermore, incoming calls on the mobile were free as per Tariff Code JP3001451. And on seeing the email dated 11.10.2014 he was shocked as he had landed in Japan less than 3 days prior to the receipt of the email and there was hardly any usage of mobile phone by the Complainant. He even feared that the final bill would be much higher than the said sum of Rs. 77,310/-. He immediately wrote a reply dated 11.10.2014 by email, clearly explaining that the Opposite Party had miscalculated the usage and that he wouldn't have made calls chargeable for which a bill of a sum of Rs.77,310/- could have been raised. He then received a cryptic email dated 11.10.2014 from the Opposite Party confirming the details of the usage and asking for a concurrence to keep the service active. He was in utter shock and dismay at the callous attitude of the Opposite Party without verifying the usage details or responding to the issues raised by the Complainant in his email. It is unfortunate and in fact unbelievable that the Opposite Party claims to have an award winning product/service as claimed, if the Complainant's experience with the executives of the Opposite Party was anything to go by. After receiving the said email he was thoroughly upset and he could not enjoy his first trip to Japan and it is highly improbable that the Complainant could visit Japan again and therefore, the Complainant couldn't enjoy the scenic beauty of the country. He was in such a deep fear of being extorted by the Opposite Party that he chose not to use the mobile/SIM cards provided by the Opposite Party when he visited China and Hong Kong and instead, he used the call cards available in the cities he visited and incurred a heavy cost on account of his telecom expenses. He had to search for outlets having international dialing service and suffered immense mental agony at being not able to speak to his family members at his convenience.

On his return to India, he received Bill No. JPN3846478 dated 07.11.2014 for Agreement No. T1000870805. Curiously, the amount in the said bill was Rs. 9689.06/- (inclusive of taxes and charges) and the Complainant was unable to fathom as to how and why the Opposite Party sent an email dated 11.10.2014 indicating the usage of Rs.77,310/- when the actual and total usage was only Rs. 9689.06/-. He had to undergo a traumatic experience in a foreign country because of an unmindful and negligent action of the personnel of the Opposite Party. The email dated 11.10.2014 of the Opposite Party had instilled fear in the mind of the Complainant about the services of the Opposite Party and its devious and deceitful method in cheating innocent consumers. He also received Bill No. CHN3835475 dated 20.10.2014 for a sum of Rs. 661.80/- and Bill No. HK3795465 dated 30.10.2014 for a sum of Rs. 729.22/-, even though he did not use the mobile/SIM during his stay in China and Hong Kong. Immediately on his return to India, he returned all the mobile/SIM cards to the representatives of the Opposite Party and the same has been acknowledged under a Receipt bearing S. No. A-301469 dated 28.10.2014. He underwent tremendous and immeasurable pressure and mental trauma at his inability to contact his loved ones back home as he feared the outrageously exorbitant amount in the email dated 11.10.2014 would soar up if he makes calls. He had to spend a reasonable chunk of foreign exchange he carried on phone call expenses and was unable to enjoy his trip as his financial resources had to be kept on a check in view of the exigency created by the deficient, deplorable and shabby services of the Opposite Party. The mental trauma suffered by him in a foreign land, where majority of people did not speak English, where he had to greatly suffer due to the deficient and negligent acts of the Opposite Party because of which the Complainant could not enjoy his holiday are all squarely and directly attributable to the acts of omission and commissions of the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party insisted on the payment of a sum of Rs. 11,941.08/- being the total amount covered under the three bills as mentioned above, the Complainant issued a notice dated 18.11.2014 through his counsel calling upon the Opposite Party to pay a sum of Rs. 4,88,058.92/- being the compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- after deducting the said sum of Rs. 11,941.08/- for which he received no reply from the Opposite Party. He received yet another cryptic email dated 13.06.2015 from the Opposite Party regarding payment of a sum of Rs.10,880.08/- and the email proceeds as though the Complainant is untraceable. There is no whisper about the notice dated 18.11.2014 issued by the Complainant, the language and tenor of which is highly despicable and actionable. On 13.06.2015, the Complainant issued another notice through his counsel to the Opposite Party setting out the true facts and also interalia stated that no reply or communications has been received by the Complainant in respect of the earlier notice dated 18.11.2014. He was thereafter contacted by Mr. Amit Puri of the Opposite Party who requested the Complainant to reach him the documents through email and his email ID that he gave to the Complainant was amit puri@matrix.com and the said Mr.Amit Puri assured the Complainant amicably. Much to the Complainant's surprise, when he attached and sent that the issue will be resolved the documents to the email as advised on 18.06.2015, the email bounced as the email address provided to him was  incorrect/did not exist on 18.06.2015. He was hopeful of an amicable resolution of the issue, the Opposite Party issued an undated reply notice which was received by the counsel of the Complainant on 26.06.2015 which was filled with completely twisted contents. While this being so, the Complainant received yet another email dated 20.08.2015 from the Opposite Party, regarding payment of a sum of Rs. 10,880.08/- with the same cryptic content. In view of the shocking and awful customer service of the Opp. Party, the Complainant decided to pay the monies claimed by the Opp. Party under protest, reserving his right to initiate action against the Opposite Party for their deficient service. The said decision of the Complainant was communicated to the Opposite Party vide an email dated 03.09.2015 issued through his counsel. The entire monies as claimed by the Opposite Party was paid under protest by way of cash/cheque to the representatives of the Opposite Party on 08.10.2015 and the same has been acknowledged under receipt no. CHN/48334 dated 08.10.2015. The entire point of utilizing the services of the Opposite Party became redundant and otiose in view of the deficient and inadequate customer service provided by the Opposite Party and the Complainant had to spend considerable sum of money from his foreign exchange on phone calls. The instances as sated above clearly make out the unfair and improper trade practices of the Opposite Party in addition to their complete lack of professionalism and customer service making it a classic case of deficiency in service. Hence the complaint.

3.Written Version filed by the Opposite Party in brief are as follows:-

        It is submitted that the Complainant had in fact taken from the Opposite Party two International Mobile Connections in lieu of his foreign travels. The Complainant vide Agreements bearing No.T1000870805 bearing the telephone No.09028056332 had in fact taken this International connections from the Opposite Party. It is  submitted that it was the Complainant who approached the Opposite Party for the International Sim Connection. As per the convenience and requirement of Complainant, Opposite Party has provided the tariff sheet to the Complainant as it was the same as provided in the cyclostyled tariff sheet. No bills where raised on the outstanding amount which has been mentioned in the complainant. Further it is submitted that the bill which has been raised by the Opposite Party is strictly adhered with the call rates of Tariff Sheet (which has been opted by the Complainant), Ledger Account, Terms and conditions of the Customer Agreement Form and the usage mentioned in the Itemized bills. It is submitted that no such bills have been raised by the Opposite Party company of the amount Rs 77,310/-. Further it is submitted that the Bills which has been raised of amount Rs.9,869.06/- it is according to the Data Usage and call rates which is in accordance, and adhered to the tariff sheet which has been accepted by the Complainant in a Customer Agreement Form along with its terms and conditions. It is submitted that no further bills has been raised of the amount Rs.661.80 and Rs.729.22 respectively. The Complainant is not entitled for the compensation. It is submitted that bill alleged to have been raised by the Opposite Party company and has not been annexed by the Complainant with the copy of the complaint, and the copy of the notice has not been annexed by the Complainant. It is submitted that the usage and the call rates has been charged and it was strictly adhered with the terms and conditions provided in the customer agreement form, the tariff plan which has been chosen by the Complainant and the same was mentioned in the customer agreement form which has been duly accepted by the Complainant, hence the Complainant is bound to follow the terms and conditions mentioned in the customer agreement form and is liable to pay the amount which is accrued from the usage of the sim provided by the Opposite Party company. It is furthermore submitted that the various amounts which has been mentioned by the Complainant or any of the email conversation which has been mentioned in the copy of complaint provided to Opposite Party none of them has been annexed with it. Hence in all these contentions there is no need of reply on behalf of the Opposite Party. The Complainant has not filed the sufficient documents of the contentions which has been mentioned in the copy of complaint. Hence prayed to dismiss the complaint.

4.      The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-18 were marked.

The Opposite Party submitted its Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Opposite Party, documents Ex.B-1 to Ex.B-6 were marked.

Points for Consideration

1. Whether the Opposite Party had committed deficiency of service?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed in the Complaint?

3. Whether the Complainant is entitled for any other relief/s?

Point No.1 :-

        It is an undisputed fact that the Complainant had availed services of the Opposite Party by purchasing a Sim Card to be used during his visit to Japan, China and Hongkong. It is also not in dispute that the Complainant had travelled to said countries and used the Sim Card of the Opposite Party.

The Disputed fact is that when the Complainant stayed at Japan, he had received a mail dated 11.10.2014 around 11 am from the Opposite Party, wherein the Bill Amount for the usage made by the Complainant was mentioned as Rs.77,310/- and further the Opposite Party asked for confirmation whether to keep the service active and also mentioned that it was not the final bill, as he had reached Japan only on 08.10.2014 evening, he was shocked on seeing the said mail of the Opposite Party claiming Rs.77,310/- for his 2 days usage and feared that the final bill amount would be higher than the said bill amount. Further on receipt of the said mail he was totally upset and could not enjoy his first trip to Japan and further he had decided not to use the SIM Card of the Opposite Party on his visit to China and Hongkong.

        The contention of the Complainant is that when he stayed at Japan, he had received a mail dated 11.10.2014 around 11 am from the Opposite Party, as found in Ex.A-5, wherein the Bill Amount for the usage made by the Complainant was mentioned as Rs.77,310/- and further asked for his confirmation to keep the service active and also mentioned that it was not the final bill, as he had reached Japan on 08.10.2014 evening, he was shocked on seeing the said mail of the Opposite Party claiming Rs.77,310/- for his 2 days usage and feared that the final bill amount would be higher than the said bill amount and further on receipt of the said mail he was totally upset and could not enjoy his first trip to Japan and further he had decided not to use the SIM Card of the Opposite Party on his visit to China and Hongkong. Hence on receipt of the said mail, he had sent a reply mail dated 11.10.2014, as found in Ex.A-6, wherein he had explained his shock and to provide correct calculation and further he had clearly mentioned that he would use the sim card in any country. For which a rejoinder mail dated 11.10.2014 as found in Ex.A-7 has been sent by the Opposite Party to the Complainant, wherein it was mentioned that they need to wait till billing get finalized as they had completely depended upon the network of the same. Only on 07.11.2014 the actual usage of the Complainant at Japan had been provided for an amount of Rs.9,689.06p, as found in Ex.A-8. On 30.10.2014 the usage of the Complainant at China had been provided for an amount of Rs.561.80p, as found in Ex.A-9, as he did not used the Sim card of the Opposite Party at China, as well as he had been sent a Bill dated 20.10.2014 for a sum of Rs.729.22/- for the usage at Hongkong, though he had not used, the said bill was not produced before this Commission. Immediatley on return to Chennai the Complainant had returned the Sim Cards to the Opposite Party on 28.10.2014 under Receipt bearing S.no.A-301469, as found in Ex.A-10. Thereafter had sent a legal notice dated 18.11.2014, which was marked as Ex.A-11 claiming a sum of Rs.4,88,058.92p deducting a sum of Rs.11,941.08p being claimed by the Opposite Party towards usage of the Sim Card, though the Opposite Party had received the said Legal Notice, had not responded to the same. But by mail dated 13.06.2015 as found in Ex.A-12, the Opposite Party had claimed a sum of Rs.10,880.08p from the Complainant, wherein it was also mentioned that they tried to reach the Complainant but of no use and to respond to their mail within 48 hours. On receipt of Ex.A-12, the Complainant was constrained to send a Reply notice dated 13.06.2015, as found in Ex.A-13, wherein the Opposite Party was called upon to withdraw their mail dated 13.06.2015 and to comply with the demand made in his earlier Legal Notice dated 18.11.2014, Ex.A-11. Again on 18.06.2015 the Complainant though his Advocate had sent a mail with all details as attachments to the Opposite Party which had got bounced, as found in Ex.A-14. But to the Notice dated 13.06.2015, Ex.A-13, the Opposite Party had sent a reply notice dated Nil though their Advocate, wherein the payment of Rs.10,880.08p was claimed, denying the other contents, which is marked as Ex.A-15. Thereafter by Ex.A-16, being  mail dated 20.08.2015 the Opposite Party had claimed for the said sum of Rs.10,880.08p to be paid within 48 hours. As the Opposite Party had come forward to resolve the issues of the Complainant, the Complainant having lost hope had requested the Opposite Party to send their representative and to collect the Cheque for the said sum of Rs.10,880.08p under Mail dated 03.09.2015, as found in Ex.A-17 and the receipt issued by the Opposite Party towards payment of  the said sum of Rs.10,880.08p is marked as Ex.A-18.

The Opposite Party contended that the bill which has been raised by the Opposite Party is strictly adhered with the call rates of Tariff Sheet, which has been opted by the Complainant, Ledger Account, terms and conditions of the Customer Agreement Form and the usage mentioned in the itemized bills. No such bills have been raised by the Opposite Party company of the amount Rs.77,310/-. Further contended that the bills which has been raised of amount Rs.9869.06p it is according to the Data Usage and call rates which is the Complainant in a Customer Agreement Form along with its terms and conditions and is liable to pay the amount which is accrued from the usage of the SIM provided by the Opposite Party company. The Opposite Party had marked Ex.B1 to B6 being the Bills along with Itemized bill dated 30.10.2014 and 07.11.2014 for the usage of the Complainant at Hongkong, China and Japan.

On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, that Ex.A-5 being the mail dated 11.10.2104 sent by the Opposite Party to the Complainant, without verifying the usage made by the Complainant at their end claimed an amount of Rs.77,310/- and further had mentioned that it was not the final bill, would have certainly made the Complainant under tremendous pressure without concentrating on his trip to foreign countries, which would also made him not to avail the services of the Opposite Party in other Countries which he had planned, viz., China and Hongkong, further the Complainant with a fond hope that he could reach his family and friends,had availed the Services of the Opposite Party. Further the Opposite Party had failed to provide the details of actual usage when the Complainant sent a reply mail dated 11.10.2014 to the Opposite Party from Japan, as found in Ex.A-6. Hence, the above said acts of the opposite party clearly amounts to negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party and thereby had caused serious mental agony and tremendous pressure to the Complainant. Hence, this Commission is of the considered view that the Opposite Party had committed deficiency of service. Accordingly Point No.1 is answered.

Point Nos.2 and 3:-

As discussed and decided point no.1 against the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party is liable to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards deficiency of service and mental agony and to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards costs. And the Complainant is not entitled for any other relief/s.

In the result the complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite Party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) towards deficiency of service and mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) towards costs, within 8 weeks from the date of this order, failing compliance, the above amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of this order till the date of realisation.

In the result the Complaint is allowed.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 10^th of August 2022.  

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

 List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

Ex.A1	-	Copy of Screenshots of the website of the Opposite Party
Ex.A2	-	Copy of Tariff as provided by representatives of the Opposite Party
Ex.A3	06.10.2014	Copy of Email Confirmation Letter of the Opposite Party
Ex.A4	06.10.2014	Copy of Payment Receipt No. R-48171/2014 2015
Ex.A5	11.10.2014	Copy of Email from the Opposite Party
Ex.A6	11.10.2014	Copy of Reply email of the Complainant
Ex.A7	11.10.2014	Copy of Email from the Opposite Party
Ex.A8	07.11.2014	Copy of Bill No. JPN3846478
Ex.A9	20.10.2014	Copy of Bill No. CHN3835475
Ex.A10	28.10.2014	Copy of Stock Book Receipt S. No. A-301469 for returned all the mobile/SIM cards.
Ex.A11	18.11.2014	Copy of Legal Notice issued by the Complainant with proof of delivery
Ex.A12	13.06.2015	Copy of Email from Mr.Sulthan, Credit Control Department of the Opposite Party
Ex.A13	13.06.2015	Copy of Legal notice issued by the Complainant with proof of delivery
Ex.A14	18.06.2015	Copy of Email to Mr. AmitPuri- Bounced
Ex.A15	-	Copy of Undated Reply Notice of Opposite Party
Ex.A16	20.08.2015	Copy of Email from Mr.Sulthan, Credit Control Department of the Opposite Party
Ex.A17	03.09.2015	Copy of Email on behalf of Complainant to make payment under protest reserving right to initiate action
Ex.A18	08.10.2015	Copy of Receipt No.48334 for payment of Rs.10,880/-

 

Documents filed by the Opposite Parties are as follows:-

 

Ex.B1	30.10.2014	Copy of Bill (front sheet for the usage at Hong Kong
Ex.B2	-	Copy of Itemized bill for Bill No.HK3795465
Ex.B3	30.10.2014	Copy of Bill (Front sheet) for the usage at China
Ex.B4	-	Copy of Itemized Bill for Bill No.CHN3835475
Ex.B5	07.11.2014	Copy of Bill (Front Sheet) for the usage at Japan
Ex.B6	-	Copy of Itemized Bill for Bill No.JPN3846478

 

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                   B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT