BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.107/2015

DATED ON THIS THE 13^th April 2017

      Present:  1) Sri. H.M.Shivakumara Swamy

B.A., LLB., - PRESIDENT   

    2) Smt. M.V.Bharathi                    

                                   B.Sc., LLB., -  MEMBER

                     3) Sri. Devakumar.M.C.                  

                                                          B.E., LLB.,    - MEMBER

Sri DEVAKUMAR.M.C,

Member

1.     The complainant filed the complaint under section 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986, against the opposite parties, alleging  deficiency of service and unfair trade practice and seeking a direction to pay damages of Rs.1,50,000/-, cost and litigation expenses of Rs.30,000/- and additional damages of Rs.50,000/- with such other reliefs.
2.     The complainant had an Airtel – GSM SIM card.  He was intended to switch to reliance CDMA.  A mobile phone was purchased for a sum of Rs.24,000/-, which would accept CDMA type of SIM card. Intending to avail mobile number portability (MNP) from Airtel GSM to Reliance CDMA furnished all the desired information for the same.  The opposite party executives informed about mistakes occurred in documentation form.  The opposite parties fail to resolve the issue and advice to adjust with a GSM.  Aggrieved complainant got issued a legal notice, but the opposite parties neither replied not took any action.  Hence, the complaint, seeking reliefs.
3.     Opposite party No.2 filed version and denies the allegations as false.  It submits that the complainant was desirous to migrate to Reliance CDMA network.  Because of not noting the MNP in the form, the complainant was provided with GSM network service.  On ascertaining the error, it was promised to set right the mistakes after the lapse of three months from the date of switching over the network.  But the complainant was not prepared to avail the Reliance CDMA benefits, to make unlawful gain by way this complaint.  Therefore, the opposite party contended that, there was no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice by them.  As such, they are not liable to pay any compensation and prays for dismissal of the complaint.
4.     To establish the facts, the complainant lead his evidence by filling affidavit and relied on certain documents.  The opposite party No.1 lead its evidence.  Written arguments filed.  After hearing complainant’s counsel and on perusing material on record, matter posted for orders.
5.     The points arose for our consideration are:-

1. Whether the complainant establishes the deficiency in service or unfair trade practice by the opposite parties in not switching over Airtel GSM to Reliance CDMA, as requested and thereby he is entitled for the reliefs?
2.  What order?

6.    Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1 :- Partly in the affirmative.

Point No.2 :- As per final order for the following

:: R E A S O N S ::

7.    Point No.1:- The complainant was intended to switch over from Airtel GSM network to Reliance CDMA, purchased a mobile handset worth Rs.24,000/-, which would accept the CDMA type of SIM card.  A form filled with particulars and submitted with relevant documents for mobile number portability (MNP) from Airtel GSM to Reliance CDMA.  Still the opposite parties committed mistake and noted down only particulars without the MNP request.  Several requests, went in vain, as the Airtel GSM were already released the codes from their company.  The opposite parties expressed their inability and advised to adjust with GSM connection for a period of three months.  Aggrieved by the same, complainant filed the complaint, and sought for the reliefs.
8.    The opposite party admitted that, the complainant was desired to switch over to Airtel GSM to Reliance CDMA network.  The mobile number portability (MNP) was admitted and denied the purchase of mobile handset worth Rs.24,000/- and the same would accept CDMA type of SIM.  The complainant approached opposite party, seeking switch over from Airtel GSM to Reliance CDMA.  The opposite party admitted that, by virtue of the mistake, the complainant’s request was not noted down in the MNP form, which resulted in providing a GSM network service.  Thereby, the opposite party informed the complainant and requested him to wait for a period of three months to rectify the mistakes crept in.  But, the complainant not intended to wait for the said period alleged deficiency in service and for the hardship, inconvenience had filed the present complaint and sought for the reliefs.  As such, opposite party contended that, they have not committed any deficiency and the complainant is not entitled for any reliefs and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
9.    The complainant established that, he had Airtel GSM SIM card and was intended to switch over to Reliance CDMA network services and had submitted the mobile number portability (MNP) form with relevant particulars and documents.  Because of the error crept in, the opposite parties failed to provide the CDMA services and requested the complainant to wait for a period of three months to provide desired services.  As such, the complainant established the deficiency in service by the complainant.  So, we opine that, certainly there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and are liable to compensate the complainant, for the hardship and inconvenience caused.     Accordingly, point No.1 is answered partly in the affirmative.
10. Point No.2:- In view of the above observations, we proceed to pass the following

:: O R D E R ::

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. The opposite parties are jointly and severally hereby directed to pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- for the deficiency in service and Rs.2,000/- towards inconvenience and hardship caused and Rs.1,000/- towards cost of the proceedings, to the complainant, within 60 days of this order.  Failing to comply, the opposite parties shall pay interest at 10% p.a. on the said total sum of Rs.5,000/- until compliance.
3.  In case of default to comply this order, the opposite parties to undergo imprisonment and also liable for fine under section 27 of the C.P.Act, 1986.
4. Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules.

 (Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on this the 13^th April 2017)

                          (H.M.SHIVAKUMARA SWAMY) 

                                      PRESIDENT     

(M.V.BHARATHI)                           (DEVAKUMAR.M.C.)

      MEMBER                                         MEMBER