Kerala

Trissur

CC/09/622

Abdul Salam - Complainant(s)

Versus

Reliance communication - Opp.Party(s)

Adv.P.P Haris

25 Mar 2010

ORDER


CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUMAyyanthole , Thrissur
CONSUMER CASE NO. 09 of 622
1. Abdul SalamKadambottu (H),Eriyad,AKG Nagar,KodungallurThrissurKerala ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. Reliance communicationGovt. Hospital Juction,KodungallurThrissurKerala2. Reliance CommunicationA&P Arcade,sahodharan Ayyapan Road,Kadavanthra,CochinErnamkulamKerala ...........Respondent(s)


For the Appellant :Adv.P.P Haris, Advocate for
For the Respondent :

Dated : 25 Mar 2010
ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

 
By Sri.M.S.Sasidharan, Member
The complainant’s case is as follows:
         The complainant availed a telephone connection from the 1st respondent by No.9349978977 and was used it for his personal purposes. All the bills were paid before 12th of every month. He has remitted Rs.220/- as the bill amount for the month of June as 11/6/09 and a receipt was issued by the 2ndrespondent in this regard. But the connection was cut on 12/6/09. On enquiry on 23/6/09 it was told that the disconnection was due to non remittance of the bill. The complainant was a social worker and he is the office bearer of some of this kind of social service organizations. Due to the disconnection of telephone the complainant failed to attend so many activities. So a notice was issued on 7/7/09.   Following the receipt of the notice the telephone connection was restored. But the financial loss was not compensated. Hence the complaint.
 
          2.The respondents are called absent and declared exparte.
 
         3. The complainant has filed affidavit and produced five documents to prove his case. They are marked as Exhibits P1 to P5.
 
         4. The case of the complainant is that he has been paying the telephone bills before its due dates. Likewise Rs.220/-, the bill amount for the month of June 2009 was paid on 11/6/2009. But the telephone was disconnected. On enquiry it was told that the disconnection was due to non remittance of bill amount for the month of June 2009. The complainant is a social worker and the office bearer of some social service organizations. As his telephone connection was not in service he failed to attend some of its activities. On issuing a legal notice the connection was restored.    But the losses due to the disconnection of telephone service was not compensated. And there is no contradictory evidence to the evidence produced by the complainant. 
 
          5. In the result the complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as compensation and Rs.500/- (Rupees Five hundred only) as cost within one month.   If not paid within the time stipulated the amount will carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum till realization.
 
 
 
 
 
 

             Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 25th day of March 2010.


HONORABLE Rajani P.S., MemberHONORABLE Padmini Sudheesh, PRESIDENTHONORABLE Sasidharan M.S, Member