BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.301 of 2018
Date of Inst. 23.07.2018
Date of Decision: 08.01.2020
Dr. Rohit Chopra S/o Sh. Pawan Chopra age 32 years R/o H. NO NB 266 Lakshmi Pura, Jalandhar City, Punjab Pin 144001.
..........Complainant
Versus
Netplus Broadband, Through its Director/General Manager/Manager/Representative.
C/o Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd., 6th Floor The Grand Mall Building Near Radisson Hotel GT Road Jalandhar 144201
….….. Opposite Parties
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)
Smt. Jyotsna (Member)
Present: Sh. Rajat Chopra, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant. Sh. Satnam Singh, Adv. Counsel for the OP.
Order
Karnail Singh (President)
1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that he is a customer/consumer and received a call from representative of the netplus which is OP and representative of the OP proposed the plans of the OP and complaint agreed to opt the same. On 29.06.2018 executive of the OP came to the house of the complainant and got signed some documents by demanding ID Proof of the complainant and also took one photograph of the complainant and also received Rs.250/- along with the copy of bill of existing connection, but no receipt was provided by the OP for this and representative of the OP assured the complainant that the connection will be activated by the OP by next day and an account will be generated on the same day, regarding this user name and password was received by the complainant by the OP on registered number i.e. 9815511688. It is worthwhile to mention here that the existing connect connection was disconnected by the representative of the OP through email and CC of the email was done by the representative of the OP to the complainant and complainant remained without the internet connection for a week as the OP failed to activate the connection of the broadband of the complainant as per the commitment. On the next day, one representative of the OP came and showed his inability to install the connection with a reason that no more connection can be allotted in this area as no DP is vacant here, when the OP will receive any disconnection then the connection will be installed in the premises of the complaint i.e. Lakshmi Pura Jalandhar. The complainant requested many time to install the connection of internet as complainant was not able to see the security cameras installed at the premises of the complainant, but the OP did not pay any heed on the genuine request of the complainant. The complainant faced harassment and mental agony due to the conduct of the OP and as such, the instant complaint filed with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to install the connection and further, OPs be directed to pay compensation to the complainant on account of mental harassment and agony to the tune of Rs.70,000/- and legal fee of Rs.15,000/-.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who appeared through its counsel and filed written reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the instant complaint is not maintainable as the same is vague and evasive. It is further alleged that the complaint under reply is a gross abuse of the process of law. The complainant has filed the complaint with the sole motive of pressurizing and harassing the answering OP to submit to the unreasonable and mischievous demands of the complainant and further averred that the present complaint is not maintainable in the eyes of law and the same has not been properly drafted or clarify the facts which the complainant wants to present before the Forum nor the same has been filed under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act. It is further alleged that the complainant is not falls under the definition of Consumer. The complainant himself is a wrong doer and it is settled law that a person, who comes to the Forum with soil hands is not entitled to any relief. The complainants have filed this complaint on the false and concocted story, whereas the true and corrects facts are that the complainant approached the OP for the connection of NetPlus Broadband to be installed at his residence regarding which the OP in order to install the connection have created the ID of the complainant subject to the condition that the same can be allotted if the DP installed in the area of the complainant was vacant only. This fact was clearly apprised to the complainant and when the representative of the OP visited the house of the complainant and checked the DP installed in that area, it was found that there is no connection is vacant as such, the connection cannot be installed. The OP has not charged even a single penny regarding his visit nor at the time of creating the ID. At the time of visiting the house of the complainant it was found that already internet connection of Connect Company was running therein, which is still in running condition and as such, there is no deficiency on the part of the OP, therefore, complaint may be dismissed. On merits, except the creating of ID, the all other facts are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.
3. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.CA and some documents Ex.C1 and Ex.C2 and closed the evidence.
4. Similarly, counsel for the OP tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.OPA and some documents Ex.O-1 to Ex.O-4 and closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also gone through the case file very minutely.
6. Precisely, the allegations of the complainant are only that he was allured by the representative of the OP for getting Broadband connection in his house and accordingly, the complainant paid Rs.250/- alongwith his photographs and ID Proof and thereafter, ID was created by the OP and sent to the complainant on his mobile phone and even the existing broadband connection was got disconnected by the representative of the OP and alleged that there is a deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.
7. We have sympathetically considered the submission of the learned counsel for the complainant and find that the story elaborated by the complainant itself show that he has not paid any amount against the receipt, no doubt, the complainant alleged in Para No.2 of the complaint that he paid Rs.250/-, but no receipt has been issued by the OP, this fact is not digestible because complainant is not an ordinary prudent man or illiterate, rather he is a doctor and whenever any educated person such like a complainant paid any amount to any company, then he must get a bill, so the story propounded by the complainant that the bill was not issued, is not acceptable and ultimately, we find that the complainant has not paid any penny to the OP and as per Consumer Protection Act, some consideration is to be paid for availing the services or agreed to pay or agreed to partly pay later on, but this is not the case of the complainant. So, if the complainant has not paid anything as consideration for availing services from the OP, then complainant is obviously not a consumer, if so, then the complaint is not maintainable.
8. Further, the complainant alleged that his existing connection was got disconnected by the representative of the OP, but this fact is also not corroborated by any documentary evidence rather one copy of the email produced on the file by the complainant, which is Ex.C-2 itself shows that the said email was sent by Rohit Chopra to the company for disconnecting of his connection. So, from all angles, the allegations of the complainant are not established, if so, then the complainant is not entitled for any relief and accordingly, the complaint of the complainant is dismissed with no order of cost. Parties will bear their own costs. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
9. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Dated Jyotsna Karnail Singh
08.01.2020 Member President
