BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.512 of 2015

Date of Instt. 04.12.2015

Date of Decision : 22.09.2016

Rohit Gambhir son of Bodh Raj Gambhir R/o 117, Vijay Nagar, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

1.Quadrant Televentures Ltd., (formely known as HFCL Infotel Limited), Corporate Office, B71, Industrial Area, Phase-VII, Industrial Focal Point, Mohali-160055, Punjab through its Managing Director/CEO/Authorized Representative.

2.Quadrant Televentures Ltd., (formely known as HFCL Infotel Limited), Zonal Office, KM Stone 8, GT Road, Paragpur, Jalandhar through its Zonal Manager/Authorized Representative.

.........Opposite parties

Complaint Under Section 12 of The Consumer Protection Act.

Before: S. Bhupinder Singh (President)

Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Complainant in person.

Sh.AS Sohal Adv., counsel for the OPs.

Order

Bhupinder Singh (President)

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of 'The Consumer Protection Act' against the opposite parties (hereinafter called as OPs) on the averments that the complainant is the user of telephone and internet services provided by OPs on telephone No.0181-5016748 with account No.2478189 under monthly broadband plan of Rs.899/- per month and the complainant has been using the aforesaid telephone and internet services for the last about 1½ years. The said telephone/internet connection is installed at the residence of the complainant H.No.117, Vijay Nagar, Jalandhar. The complainant submitted that in the last week of September, 2015, the complainant faced problem of slow speed of internet on the aforesaid internet connection. Resultantly, the complainant approached OP who advised the complainant to lodge complaint at customer care number of the OP. The complainant lodged complaint to the customer care desk of OPs vide complaint No.14965673 dated 30.9.2015. The technical expert of the OP visited the premises of the complainant but he could not solve the problem and went away. Thereafter, no technician or mechanic from the OPs attended the complaint of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant lodged complaints on various occasions i.e. complaint No.15082453 dated 8.11.2015, complaint No.15085401 dated 10.11.2015, complaint No.15092028 dated 14.11.2015, complaint No.15096759 dated 16.11.2015 and complaint No.15116995 dated 24.11.2015. The OPs acknowledged the pendency of the complaints of the complainant through SMS but no engineer of the OP visited the premises of the complainant to solve the problem. The complainant further submitted that the said problem was solved by the OP in December 2015. The problem of slow speed of internet remained on the aforesaid internet connection of the complainant for about three months i.e. from the last week of September 2015 to last week of December 2015. Thereby, the complainant suffered loss financially and also suffered mental tension, agony, inconvenience and harassment, due to deficiency of service on the part of the OPs qua the complainant. On such averments, the complainant has prayed for directing the OPs to damages of Rs.50,000/- alongwith the litigation expenses of Rs.15,000/.

2. Upon notice, OPs appeared through counsel and filed a written reply pleaded that the complainant choose the plan of Rs.899/- per month with 1MBPS speed and as per company's record, the OP has provided the speed of 1MBPS for telephone No.0181-5016748 at the complainant address. The OP produced the snapshot of the broadband of this phone number taken on 29.2.2016. The OP submitted that if the complainant is not satisfied with this speed then he may choose the bigger plan with higher speed.

3. In support of his complaint, complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CA alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C9 and closed his evidence.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.OP-A alongwith copy of document Ex.OP1 and closed evidence.

5. We have heard the Ld. counsel for the parties, minutely gone through the record and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of Ld. counsels for the parties.

6. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it is clear that the complainant is the user of telephone and internet services provided by OPs on telephone No.0181-5016748 with account No.2478189 under monthly broadband plan of Rs.899/- per month and the complainant has been using the aforesaid telephone and internet services for the last about 1½ years at the time of filing of the complaint. The said telephone/internet connection is installed at the residence of the complainant H.No.117, Vijay Nagar, Jalandhar. The complainant submitted that in the last week of September, 2015, the complainant faced problem of slow speed of internet on the aforesaid internet connection. Resultantly, the complainant approached OP who advised the complainant to lodge complaint at customer care number of the OP. Resultantly, the complainant lodged complaint to the customer care desk of OPs vide complaint No.14965673 dated 30.9.2015 as is evident from SMS received from OPs Ex.C5 to Ex.C9. The technical expert of the OP visited the premises of the complainant but he could not solve the problem and went away. Thereafter, no technician or mechanic from the OPs attended the complaint of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant lodged complaints on various occasions i.e. complaint No.15082453 dated 8.11.2015, complaint No.15085401 dated 10.11.2015, complaint No.15092028 dated 14.11.2015, complaint No.15096759 dated 16.11.2015 and complaint No.15116995 dated 24.11.2015. The OPs acknowledged the pendency of the complaints of the complainant through SMS Ex.C5 to Ex.C9 but no engineer of the OP visited the premises of the complainant to solve the problem. The complainant further submitted that the said problem was solved by the OP in December 2015. The problem of slow speed of internet remained on the aforesaid internet connection of the complainant for about three months i.e. from the last week of September 2015 to last week of December 2015. Thereby, the complainant suffered loss financially and also suffered mental tension, agony, inconvenience and harassment, due to deficiency of service on the part of the OPs qua the complainant.

7. Whereas the case of the OPs is that the complainant choose the plan of Rs.899/- per month with 1MBPS speed and as per company's record, the OP has provided the speed of 1MBPS for telephone No.0181-5016748 at the complainant address. The OP produced the snapshot of the broadband of this phone number taken on 29.2.2016 Ex.OP1. The OP submitted that if the complainant is not satisfied with this speed then he may choose the bigger plan with higher speed. Learned counsel for the OPs submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OP qua the complainant.

8. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that the complainant has been availing internet services from the OP on his telephone No.0181-5016748 with account No.2478189 under broadband plan of Rs.899/- per month, for the last more than 1½ years. The the complainant faced problem of slow speed of internet on his aforesaid internet connection in the last week of September, 2015 and he lodged complaint No.14965673 dated 30.9.2015 at customer care number of the OP which is evident from SMS received by complaint from OPs Ex.C5 to Ex.C9. As per the complainant version, the technical expert of the OP visited the premises of the complainant but he could not solve the problem and left the problem of the complainant unattended. Thereafter, no technician or mechanic from the OP came to attend the complaint of the complainant. The complainant further lodged complaints i.e. complaint No.15082453 dated 8.11.2015, complaint No.15085401 dated 10.11.2015, complaint No.15092028 dated 14.11.2015, complaint No.15096759 dated 16.11.2015 and complaint No.15116995 dated 24.11.2015 but the OP did not rectify the problem of the complainant regarding internet services. The OP through their SMS Ex.C5 to Ex.C9 have admitted that there was fault in the internet services being provided by the OP to the complainant on the aforesaid internet connection but they did not rectify the problem from last week of September 2015 to last week of December 2015 and ultimately the problem of slow speed of internet was solved by OP in last week of December 2015. Therefore, the complainant suffered from this problem of lower speed of internet facility for three months which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OP qua the complainant as a result of which the complainant suffered loss mentally, professionally/financially.

9. The plea of the OP is that the complainant has chosen plan of Rs.899/- per month with 1MBPS speed and the OP has provided speed of IMBPS on the telephone of the complainant, is not tenable because the OP could not produce any evidence that any technician or mechanic of the OP attended and rectified the complaint of the complainant during the period from last week of September 2015 to last week of December 2015 i.e. for three months. Whereas the OP has admitted that the complainant has lodged complaints regarding slow speed of internet facility at his aforesaid internet connection through SMS Ex.C5 to Ex.C9 sent by OP to the complainant and every time they assured the complainant that the fault of the complainant is internet connection is still pending with the OP and their engineer will be visiting the complainant's premises shortly; but no engineer or technician from the OP visited the premises of the complainant where the aforesaid internet connection was installed, for three months i.e. from last week of September 2015 to last week of December 2015 nor the OP could produce any report of their engineer/technician to prove that he visited the premises of the complainant and rectified the problem of slow speed of internet facility nor the OP has filed affidavit of any technician/engineer of the OP who visited the premises of the complainant and rectified the problem during the aforesaid period of three months nor the OP has filed report or affidavit of any technician/engineer of OP to prove the averments of the OP that they supplied proper speed on the aforesaid telephone/internet connection of the complainant during the aforesaid period of three months. The OP has produced on record a snapshot of 29.2.2016 Ex.OP1 to prove that on 2.2.2016 the current bandwidth on the telephone/internet connection of the complainant was proper i.e. 1024 kbps but this information is with regard to 29.2.2016 and not for the period of aforesaid three months i.e. last week of September 2015 to last week of December 2015. So by not providing proper internet services to the complainant on the aforesaid internet connection of the complainant for three months i.e. last week of September 2015 to last week of December 2015, the OP is guilty of deficiency of service qua the complainant. Thereby the complainant suffered loss mentally, professionally/financially. As such, the OPs are liable to pay compensation to the complainant

10. Resultantly, we partly allow the complaint with cost and the OPs are directed to pay compensation to the complainant to the tune of Rs.3000/- alongwith litigation expenses Rs.2000/-. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of cost, under rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Bhupinder Singh

22.09.2016 Member President