By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President:
The case is that the complainant is a well reputed businessman and had taken Data Card connection from respondents on 3.8.07. While availing the connection complainant had paid a total sum of Rs.3180/- towards data card and activation charges. He availed the said service from respondents upon the assurance that under the scheme the complainant will have to pay only an amount of Rs.1500/- per month along with taxes. In spite of this the respondents demanded an amount of Rs.2937.70 from complainant for a period of 22 days. The complainant paid the amount on 10.9.07 for which the respondents issued receipt. The respondents again issued bill demanding an amount of Rs.1955.40 for a period of one month. This act of respondents is a deficiency in service. Hence the complaint.
2. The version is that the complaint is not maintainable because the purpose of purchase of the data card connection is for commercial purpose. The complainant has committed a mistake in the application form wherein he has made the mode of payment as deferred payment scheme. The complainant has applied for RNJ 149 data card connection. As per the deferred payment scheme in the opted scheme of the complainant he had to pay the cost of the data card by instalments. Accordingly in the first bill dated 25.8.07 an amount of Rs.1741.61 is included and in the second bill dt. 25.9.07 an amount of Rs.270/- is included. When complainant has pointed out that though in the application form there is a mistake committed by him and when complainant has produced proof of payment of Rs.3180/- he was immediately given waiver of Rs.2011.61. There is no deficiency in service on the part of respondents. The complainant was enjoying the data card connection till 11.11.07 and liable to pay charges for the period 25.10.07 to 11.11.07. Hence dismiss.
3. The points for consideration are that:
(1) Whether the complaint is maintainable before the Forum?
(2) If so, reliefs and costs.
4. The evidence consists of oral testimony of PW1 and Exts. P1 to P11. No evidence adduced by respondents.
5. Points: The complainant had taken data card connection from respondents and it is stated that he is a well reputed businessman. According to the respondents the purchase of data card connection is for commercial purpose. So the respondent would say that the complainant is not a consumer under Consumer Protection Act. It is to be noted that the complainant is the proprietor of Ayoob & Company, Exporters & Wholesale Dealers in Cement. The cause title would show that the complainant is conducting a private limited company. As held by the Hon’ble National Commission the private limited company cannot file complaint before the Consumer Forum. The purchase of data card connection is for business purposes for his company and is strictly commercial and not for livelihood. In this respect the complainant is not a consumer as defined under Consumer Protection Act.
6. As ordered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.7637/04 the remedy under Consumer Protection Act is by implication barred. It is stated that when there is a special remedy provided in Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act regarding disputes in respect of telephone bills etc., the remedy under Consumer protection Act is barred. Rule 413 of the Telegraph Rules provides that all services relating to telephone are subject to Telegraph Rules. It is well settled that the special law overrides the general law. So in this context also the complaint is not maintainable before the Forum.
7. In the result the complaint stands dismissed as not maintainable.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 12th day of September 2012.
