PRESENT:- Sri. K. Gheevarghese, M A, LLB - President<br /> Smt. Saji Mathew, B.A, L.L.B - Member<br /> <br /> <br /> P.Raveendran, :<br /> Eenthanamoola Veedu, :<br /> Payyambally (P.O), : Complainant.<br /> Koyileri, Kartikulam (Via), :<br /> Wayanad. :<br /> <br /> <br /> Proprietor, :<br /> Sangeeth, :<br /> Thalasseri Road, : Opposite parties.<br /> Erumatheruvu, :<br /> Mananthavady. :<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> <br /> By Smt. Saji Mathew, Member:<br /> <br /> <br /> The gist of the complaint is as follows:<br /> <br /> <br /> On 13.05.2005 the Complainant has purchased a dish T.V DTH with ZENEGA SET TOP BOX from the Opposite party paying Rs.4,300/-. The Opposite party assured the Complainant that he would get 8 Malayalam channels for life and all channels of Doordarsan and Kairali channel free of cost. He can also get pay channels using Smart card. But for the last one month, he was not getting any channel. The Complainant has contacted the 'Dish TV'<br /> (Contd.....2)<br /> -2-<br /> authorities and they informed him that thereafter channels will not be available without using Smart Card. The Complainant states that he does not want any pay channels. He is entitled to get all the channels of Doordarsan, and that should be made available to him. The Complainant alleges that the Opposite party has charged an excess amount of Rs.310/- . The advertisement shows the price of Dish TV as 3,990/-. But the Opposite party charged Rs.4,300/-. The Complainant prays that a compensation of Rs.1000/- is to be awarded to him.<br /> <br /> The Opposite party admits in his version the sale of the Dish TV but denies the other allegation of the Complainant. The Opposite party states that they are ready to make available the free to air channels. For other 8 Malayalam channels, the Complainant has to pay monthly subscription as per subscription application form. The Opposite party states that they have not charged any excess amount from the Complainant . They have charged Rs.4,300/- including installation charge, activization charges etc. So, they content that complaint is to be dismissed. <br /> The matters to be considered are as follows:-<br /> 1. Whether any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite party.<br /> 2. Whether the Complainant is untitled for any compensation.<br /> <br /> The Complainant gave evidence as PW1. The bill is marked as Ext.A1. The brochure is marked as Ext.A2. The Opposite party filed version and thereafter made no appearance. The Opposite party has filed the subscription application form. The subscription application is signed by the Complainant. But it does not show the amount of subscription or the particulars of channel which were made available. However after the filing of the complaint, the Opposite<br /> (Contd......3)<br /> -3-<br /> party expressed their readiness to make available the free channel. Therefore it is evident that the Complainant has not been getting any channel for the 1 1/2 months as contended by him. Ext. A1 does not show the particulars Ext.A2 shows the price of Dish as Rs.3,990/- . The Complainant has alleged in his deposition that he has paid an extra Rs.150/- for the installation. Therefore it is found that an excess price of Rs.310/- is charged by the Opposite party. The Complainant is entitled to get back this amount. The Opposite party has sold the dish TV using a brochure which is vague and misreading. The SAF also is not clear and specific. The Opposite party gained benefit of sale using these documents and the Complainant spent money on false expectations. So there is deficiency on the part of the Opposite party and the Opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant. Opposite party has to retain the free channels to the Complainant. Therefore, it is held that the opposite party is liable to compensate the Complainant by an amount of Rs. 500/- (Rupees five hundred only) and the excess bill to the Complainant Rs.310/- ( Rupees three hundred and ten only) total Rs. 810/- (Rupees eight hundred and ten only) within 30 days of this order. The Complainant is entitled to execute the order as per law.<br /> Pronounced in open forum on the 18th day of December 2007.<br /> PRESIDENT: Sd/-<br /> MEMBER: Sd/-<br /> <br /> /True Copy/<br /> PRESIDENT, CDRF WAYANAD.<br /> <br /> <br /> (Contd.......4)<br /> <br /> <br /> -4-<br /> <br /> Witnesses for Complainant:<br /> <br /> PW1 P.Raveendran Complainant<br /> <br /> Witnesses for Opposite party:<br /> <br /> Nil.<br /> <br /> Exhibits for complainant:<br /> <br /> A1 Bill dt: 13.09.2005<br /> <br /> A2 Vouchure <br /> <br /> Exhibits for Opposite party:<br /> <br /> Nil.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT, CDRF WAYANAD.