Karnataka

Bangalore 4th Additional

CC/2475/2017

S.Ganesh, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Office in charge operation Hathway cables and datacom P Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

27 Mar 2018

ORDER

Complaint filed on: 05.09.2017

                                                      Disposed on: 27.03.2018

 

BEFORE THE IV ADDL DISTRICT

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BENGALURU

 1^ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027       

 

 

CC.No.2475/2017

DATED THIS THE 27^th MARCH OF 2018

 

PRESENT

 

 

SRI.S.L.PATIL, PRESIDENT

SMT.N.R.ROOPA, MEMBER

 

Complainant/s: -                           

S.Ganesh,

Aged about 62 years,

no.428, “Swathy”,

12^th cross, III Block,

BEL layout, Vidyranyapura, Bengaluru-97

 

Inperson     

 

V/s

Opposite party/s

Respondent/s:-

 

Office in charge (Operation) Hathway Cables and Datacom

(P) ltd., no.1247, 3^rd block, BEL layout, Vidyaranyapura, Bengaluru-97.

 

By Adv.Sri.S.R.Shivaprakash

 

 

PRESIDENT: SRI.S.L.PATIL

 

 

            This complaint is filed by the Complainant against the Opposite party (herein after referred as Op) seeking issuance of direction to pay Rs.10,000/- compensation for the one year repeated humiliation and mental torture suffered. Further direct him not to harass in the years to come and no more disconnection of signal till November 2017.

 

          2. The brief facts of the case of the Complainant are that, he is one of the earliest subscribers of Op paying his subscription on a yearly basis in advance. For the year 2016.17 also, he paid Rs.4,125/- on 16.11.16 and subscription valid up to November 2017. The Complainant further submits that, inspite of paying the subscription in advance, the Complainant cable connection was disconnected on 16.12.16, Jan 2017, Feb 2017, March 2017, May 2017 and Aug 2017. Every month on 16^th, he has to call to Op local office at Vidyaranyapura and to their head office near Ulsoor.  Since, no toll numbers were available, he has to spend his pocket for the calls. More gloomy part of it is, most of the time, the phone will be engaged or will not be attended for a long time. Because during June & July the Complainant went to Op office and reminded them not to disconnect the cable services, it was not disconnected. On 16.09.17, when the signal was disconnected, the Op staff started blaming him for not reminding them in advance. When protested, one of the Op staff asked him to go to Consumer Court and hence this complaint.

 

3. On receipt of the notice, Op did appear and filed version denying the allegations made in the complaint. The sum and substance of the version of the Op are that, Op is no doubt a service provider and the Complainant no doubt did availed the services of Cable TV on yearly basis. That the correct position as per records is that the connection availed by the Complainant was much prior to November 2016 and as opted for annual package for the period November 2016 to November 2017. The Op further submits that, they have received subscription of Rs.4,125/- for the said period for annual package. Unfortunately though the Complainant is very happy with the services of the Op which was prompted him to opt for the annual package has paid the annual subscription. In spite of a continuous and undisrupted supply of Cable TV signals, the Complainant has unfortunately rushed to this forum, probably at the behest of some third person to damage the reputation of Op and to make an unlawful gain. The Op further submits that, its field staff on every complaint did visited the installation, site of the Complainant and brought it to his notice that a loose connection precipitated on account of reasons unknown was the cause of disruption of services. The Complainant himself has been negligent. The Op have installed finest technical equipment to ensure prompt and clear transmission of signals and they hold the reputation as one of the finest service provider with technical competence in the country. The service almost 50% of India’s cable TV consumer’s and cannot find fault with. No documents neither evidence support the false complaint of the Complainant. The Op has right to disconnect the services on the lapse of the subscription period i.e. November 2017 if not renewed further. As a goodwill gesture and an old consumer the Op graciously offered a bonus of one year free subscription. This was also rejected by the Complainant so as to make a false claim to approach this forum to gain Rs.10,000/-. Hence prays to dismiss the complaint.  

         

          4. The Complainant to substantiate his case filed affidavit evidence and got marked the documents as Ex-P1 to P3. We have gone through the available materials on record. Heard.

  

5. The points that arise for our consideration are:

1. Whether is there any deficiency of service on the part of Op, if so, whether the Complainant entitled for the relief sought for ?  
2. What order ?

                   

           

 

6.  Our answers to the above points are as under:

 

Point no.1: In the Affirmative  

Point no.2: As per the final order for the following

 

REASONS

 

          7. Point no.1:  We have briefly stated the facts of the complaint and also the version filed by the Op. Ongoing through the version filed by Op, it is admitted in respect of taking the cable TV connection from it by the Complainant. It is also admitted in respect of receipt of subscription amount of Rs.4,125/- for the period of 16.11.16 to 16.11.17. This fact is also supported by Ex-P2 at page 7. But the version of the Op is that, the Complainant at the behest of some third person to damage the reputation of Op and to make an unlawful gain and as a matter of fact, a series of alleged dates of disconnection and malfunction has been mentioned which is denied by Op. It is also the another contention of the Op that, its staff on every complaint did visited the installation, site of the Complainant and brought it to his notice that a loose connection precipitated on account of reasons unknown was the cause of disruption of services. The Complainant himself has been negligent. Further, the Op have installed finest technical equipment to ensure prompt and clear transmission of signals and they hold the reputation as one of the finest service provider with technical competence in the country. Further it is stated in para 7 of its version that it has right to disconnect the services on the lapse of the subscription period i.e. November 2017 if not renewed further. As a goodwill gesture and an old consumer the Op graciously offered a bonus of one year free subscription. This was also rejected by the Complainant. If the above contents of OP are strictly construed, it has accepted subscription amount of Rs.4,125/- for the cable TV connection and the said period was from 16.11.16 to 16.11.17.

 

          8. Now, the question that crops up for our consideration is, where went wrong in the service rendered by Op ? The Complainant has specifically made allegations stating that, inspite of paying subscription in advance, his cable connection was disconnected on 16.12.16, Jan 2017, Feb 2017, March 2017, May 2017 and Aug 2017. In this context, he called to the Op local office at Vidyaranyapura and to the Op head office at Ulsoor, but no fruitful result expected by them. Even though he has paid the subscription for one year advance, Op is not prompt in rendering its service to his Cable TV connection. It is also the grievance of the Complainant that, during June & July he went to the office and reminded them not to disconnect cable service. On 16.09.17, when the signal was disconnected, the Op staff started blaming him for not reminding them in advance. When protested, one of the Op staff asked him to go to Consumer Court. With regard to the disconnection is concerned, Complainant has placed reliance on the contents of Ex-P1 which is the letter dtd.16.02.17 addressing by him to the Op local office in charge, which reads thus:

Sir,

Ref: Transaction ID 143362446

Sub: Poor service

Even before Hathway cables came to Vidyaranyapura, I had my cable network connection and I am one of the prompt customers paying subscription, pre-paid in time. Even to Hathway, for the last couple of years, I have opted for the annual subscription.

In spite of paying annual fee, every month I will get a SMS asking me to renew the subscription and one day service block will be resumed, after making a dozen phone calls and running up and down to Hathway office at Vidyaranyapura.

On 15^th Nov, vide your transaction ID 143362446, I have paid Rs.4,125/- for an annual fee. In spite of this on 16.12.16, 16.01.17 and now on 16.02.17, there is a service block asking me to pay the subscription.

While Hathway enjoys every right to disconnect the cable connection for no payment in advance, I as a regular customer, who has paid in advance, have privilege to approach consumer court, seeking one more month extension, for every day my service is blocked.

I request you to acknowledge the letter.

 

9. If the above contents of the said letter are strictly construed one thing is clear that, there is deficiency of service on the part of Op in disconnecting the cable connection to the TV of the Complainant.  Further ongoing through the Ex-P2 which is the email dtd.16.05.17 written by the Complainant to office of the Op, the relevant portion reads thus:

Thank you very much for the reactivation of the signal.

Nevertheless, I am very disappointed that, there is no commitment from any of you about the blocking of signal in future. Let me reiterate once again, if you cannot provide me uninterrupted service till the end of my one year term, Return my money in Pro Rata basis, so that I can pay the subscription every date you wanted and enjoy the programs.

On a goodwill I have not gone to Consumer court till now and hope you will not disconnect my connection for next 6 months failing which I will not hesitate to go to Consumer court.

I want an undertaking from Hathway management and will get a reply within a week.

 

10. If the contents of the said letter is also strictly construed one thing is clear that he has expressed his grievances in respect of the deficiency of service in cable TV services. Further ongoing through the email text of Ex-P2 found at page 6 which is in between the Op and Op’s head office reads thus:

Every month the customer box is getting disconnected, the customer is annoyed with service and given a letter, next time he will go for disconnection if the same repeats.

Based on the previous mail, release the box as soon as possible and update the validity atleast this time.

 

11. If the above email text is taken in to consideration, Op officials themselves are come to the conclusion that every month the customer (i.e. Complainant herein) box is getting disconnected and customer is annoyed with service and given a letter, next time he will go for disconnection if the same repeats. This itself is sufficient for us to come to the conclusion that, there is deficiency of service on the part of Op in giving Cable TV connection service to the Complainant.

 

12. Now, the another question that crops up for our consideration is, what is the relief to which the Complainant is entitled to ? Ongoing through the contents of the Complainant, the Complainant has sought for the compensation of Rs.10,000/- for one year repeated humiliation and mental torture suffered. With regard to ‘no more disconnection of signal till November 2017’ is considered, it becomes infructuous as now we are in the year of 2018. With regard to ‘not to harass in the years to come’ is considered, this issue will not come within the purview of this forum. We can consider only with regard to the legitimate compensation to which the Complainant is entitled to. As we already stated that, the Op has specifically admitted in respect of subscription payment of Rs.4,125/- paid by the Complainant for the cable TV services from 16.11.16 to 16.11.17. The email text of the inter say between the Op and Op’s head office at page 6 of Ex-P2 clearly indicates that every month the customer box is getting disconnected and customer is annoyed with service and given a letter, next time he will go for disconnection if the same repeats. On the basis of Pro Rata, Op is directed to refund the subscription amount out of Rs.4,125/- collected from the Complainant, for the disconnected period of the Cable TV connection for the month of 16.12.16, Jan 2017, Feb 2017, March 2017, May 2017 & Aug 2017. With regard to the compensation is concerned, we deem it just and prober to award an amount of Rs.5,000/- and cost of litigation is fixed to Rs.1,000/-. Accordingly we answered the point no.1 in the affirmative.

 

13. Point no.2: In the result, we passed the following:

 

ORDER

 

          The complaint filed by the Complainant is hereby allowed.

 

          2. On the basis of Pro Rata, Op is directed to refund the subscription amount out of Rs.4,125/- collected from the Complainant, for the disconnected period of the Cable TV connection for the month of 16.12.16, Jan 2017, Feb 2017, March 2017, May 2017 & Aug 2017 within six weeks from the date of this order.

 

          3. Op is also directed to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- and cost of litigation of Rs.1,000/- to the Complainant.

 

 

          Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.

 

          (Dictated to the Stenographer in the open forum and pronounced on 27^th March 2018).

 

 

 

(ROOPA.N.R)     MEMBER

(S.L.PATIL)  PRESIDENT

                                                                        

 

 

1. Witness examined on behalf of the complainant/s by way of affidavit:

 

Sri.S.Ganesh, who being the complainant was examined. 

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:

 

Ex-P1	Letter dtd.16.02.2017
Ex-P2	Email
Ex-P3	Statement of account

 

2. Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite party/s Respondent/s by way of affidavit:

 

• NIL -

 

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Opposite party/s

 

NIL -

 

 

 

 

(ROOPA.N.R)     MEMBER

(S.L.PATIL)  PRESIDENT