OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAMRUP,GUWAHATI
C.C.13/11
Present:-
1)Md.Sahadat Hussain, A.J.S. - President
2)Smti Archana Deka Lahkar - Member
3) Md.Jamatul Islam - Member
Mr.Jaideep Das -Complainant
House No.32, Kahilipara Colony (South)
P.O.Binovanagar, Guwahati-18
-vs-
1) Nodel Office - Opp.parties
Bharati Airtel Ltd. Bharati House,
Six mile, Khanapara,Guwahati-22
2) The Chairman
Bharti Cellular Ltd.
Qutub Ambience, H-5/12, Mehruli Road
New Delhi-110030
Appearance-
Learned advocates for the complainant- Mr A.Ullah
Learned advocates for the opp.party - Mr S.Sarma
Date of argument- 21/06/2018
Date of judgment- 06/07/2018
JUDGMENT
This is a complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
1) The complainant filed by Mr.Joydeep Das against Nodel Office, Bharati Airtel Ltd, Guwahati and the Chairman, Bharati Cellular Ltd. was admitted on 15.3.2011 and notice were served on both the opp.parties and they filed a joint written statement. Thereafter, complainant, Joydeep Das filed his evidence on affidavit and he was cross-examined by the opp.party side and then one Jayanta Thakuria filed evidence in affidavit in favour of the opp.parties. Thereafter, on 18.7.17 ,Ld advocate Mr.Azahar Ullah filed evidence for the complainant and the opp.party side has not filed no written argument and then-after, on 21.6.18, Ld.advocate Mr. Azahar Ullah forwarded oral argument for the complainant and Ld.advocate Mr.Sibanu Sarma forwarded oral argument for the opp.parties and today , we deliver our judgment which is as below.
2) The case of the complainant, in brief, is that on 20.11.10 he filed surrender request to the Customer Care Centre, (Ganeshguri) of Bharati Cellular Limited of mobile bearing No. 9957193640 and paid Rs.900/- in cash vide Receipt No. 23-11163973 and that was registered as surrender request No. 34672785 and status on the day of surrender request was Rs.915-900 + 500 = Rs.485/-, but opp.party sent two bills for the months of December and January,2011 respectively with rental charges and service taxes and then he filed a complainant vide Complaint No. 35531543 to the opp.party and then the opp.party, 3.2.2011 gave assurance to him that the bills will be waived off and the issue will be resolved and the opp.party vide E-mail dated 21.2.2011, told him that they checked the service request No. 34672785 and found that he had actually requested them to change his bill prior from Executive to Airtel Freedom 99CUG (pay per Sec.) Plan on 23.11.2010 to avail low call charges as per his old bill plan (New India Home CUG 299 ) but they received no request from his for change of bill plan , but this is a totally false story. The opp.party used to call him for praying the bills in his service and as a result he suffered disturbance in his service place, for which he suffered financial loss from 20.11.2010 till filing of the complaint at the rate of Rs.100/- daily as well as the balance amount of Rs.485/- and total amount of loss he suffered to the date of filing the complaint Rs.10,000/-(101 days X Rs.100/-) which he is entitled to get from the opp.party and also to an amount of Rs.25,000/- as compensation for causing mental suffering to him as well as Rs.485/-.
3) The pleading of the opp.parties is that the complaint is not maintainable and the complaint has no cause of action for filing this complaint. The complaint is bad for not making Customer Care Centre, Ganeshguri, which is necessary party. The complainant had not filed any surrender request to them on 20.11.2010. The amount of Rs.900/- which the complainant had paid was a payment against the out-standard bills and that was not as surrender fee. The surrender request found in their record against the mobile number of the complaint. As no surrender request was filed by the complainant, they issued bills of the month of Dec,2010 and January,2011, which the complainant was liable to pay and those two bills contained monthly rental charges and service taxes for the use of mobile phone and other necessary service from them.
They received a send request from the complainant only on 29th Jan/2011 and the bill of month of Feb/2011 is the two bills for rental charge service tax as the surrender request was received by them only on Jan 29th/2011. The bill cycle is from 8th Jan to 7th Feb/2011; therefore, the bill for month of Feb/2011 was generated and sent to the complainant and he is liable to pay rental charge and service tax up to the month of Feb,2011 and therefore, they committed no deficiency of service towards the complainant, nor harassed him. Hon’ble Supreme Court hold that when there is special remedy u/s 7(b) of Indian Telegraph Act, then the remedy under Consumer Protection Act is barred and as such the complaint is not maintainable and it is liable to be dismissed.
4) We have perused the pleading and evidence of the complainant and it is found that the complainant states in his complaint as well as in his evidence that, he filed a surrender request at Airtel (Bharati Cellular) Customer Care Centre, Ganeshguri, Guwahti and paid Rs.900/- by cash . The opp.party side plea is that the complainant had not filed any surrender request either to them or to their Customer Care Centre situated at Ganeshguri on 20.11.2010; but on that day he paid Rs.900/- by cash against his outstanding bills on that day and not as a surrender fees and there is no such surrender request found after search of entire record against the mobile number of the complainant. After perusing the evidence of the complainant it is found that he has not filed and exhibited any documents to show that he had filed surrender request of his mobile before Customer Care Centre of Bharati Airtel Ltd. situated at Ganeshguri on 20/11/2010 . In the cross examination, he admits that in the receipt of payment of Rs.900/- (Ex.I) there is no mention of surrender of his mobile connection. We have perused Ext.I and found that there is no mention that, Rs.900/- was paid by the complainant on 20.11.2010 as surrender fees. From ext.2 it is found that Ext.2 is the regular bills w.e.f.8.10.2010 to 7.11.2010; 8.11.2010 to 7.12.2010; 8.12.2010 to 7.1.2011 and 8.1.2011 to 7.2.2011. He has received these bills from the opp.parties. But there is no evidence that before filing this complaint he had sent objection against these bills to the opp.parties. Thus, we are constrained to believe that the complainant had not sent any surrender request to Airtel (Bharti Cellular) Ltd on 20.11.2010 and paid Rs.900/- as surrender charge. Therefore, we hold that the complainant has failed to prove his plea that he had, on 20/11/2010 , sent surrender request to the opp. parties and he paid Rs.500/- as surrender fee. In such premise , we hold that the complainant has no cause of action for filing this complaint and accordingly the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
5) Summing up our discussion as above, we hold that the complaint has no merit. Hence the complaint is dismissd on contest.
Given under our hands and seal on this 6th July ,2018.
(Smt Archana Deka Lahkar) (Md.Jamatul Islam) (Md.Sahadat Hussain) Member Member President
