D.o.F:25/4/2011

D.o. Order:07/03/2013

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                       CC.94/2011        

                        Dated this, the 7th  day of  March 2013.

PRESENT:

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                             : PRESIDENT

SMT.K.G.BEENA                                      : MEMBER

Kabeer.V.P,

Masters’, Poroppad, Elambachi PO,                   :  Complainant

Kasaragod .671311.

(in person)

1. Proprietor, Galaxy Communications,

Vodafone Mini store, M.G.Road,

Kasaragod.

     2.  Proprietor, Kasaragod Power House,               ; Opposite parties

          Press Club Junction, M.G.Road, Kasaragod.

3.      Chief Operating Officer, Vodafone Essar Ltd

Vodafone Kerala Circle, Mother Squire,

Ernakulam  North.

(Adv.M.Ramesh ,Hosdurg)

ORDER

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ         : PRESIDENT

          The case of the complainant is that he was a subscriber of mobile connection provided by TATA Indicom company.  Since the service of the said service provider was very poor he opted the number porting facility from Tata Indicom to Vodafone Essar Limited.  But as against the TRAI directions for the time to be taken for porting the number from one to another service provider, Vodafone  Limited company delayed the porting and as a result he suffered.  Hence the complaint.

       3^rd opposite party who is subsequently impleaded  raised an issue regarding the maintainability of the complaint in the wake of judgment  of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in General Manager BSNL vs M.K.Krishnan reported in (2009) 8 SCC 481.  According to them the dispute  is a dispute between a subscriber and Telegraph Authority and therefore it squarely comes within the purview of the said judgment and the complaint is therefore not maintainable.  They are also relying on the judgment of the Honble State Commission in Appeal No.526/10 dtd 13/10/11 between Vodafone Essar Cellular limited and Anr. Vs Madanan T.V .  In  which the Hon’ble State Commission relying on the  judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court cited supra and also in the matter of Prakash Varma vs Idea Cellular Limited in RP 1703/10  of the Hon’ble  National Commissionhas held that the dispute between a subscriber and  the mobile service provider is not  maintainable  before the Forum and the remedy  of the  subscriber is to approach the arbitrator appointed by the Central Government to settle the said dispute.

        The Hon’ble Kerala State Commission in a recent judgment dated 30/11/2012 in Appeal No.10/2012 in the case of Idea cellular  Limited vs M Lakshman Bhakta also taken  the  similar view aforementioned.

      In view of the above  findings of the Hon’ble Apex Court, National Commission  and the  Hon’ble Kerala State Commission we hold that the complaint is not maintainable before the Forum and the remedy to resolve the issue is through Arbitration Proceedings.

     The opposite party No.3 is therefore directed to take suitable steps with the Central Government to appoint an Arbitrator to adjudicate this issue within 2 months from the date of copy of receipt of this order.  Failing which they shall be liable to pay Rs. 5000/- to the complainant by way of costs of these proceedings.

MEMBER                                                                   PRESIDENT

eva