Kerala

Idukki

CC/69/2020

Ansar h - Complainant(s)

Versus

Reliance jio info com ltd - Opp.Party(s)

13 Feb 2023

ORDER

DATE OF FILING : 27/05/2020

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, IDUKKI

Dated this the 13^th day of February 2023

Present :

              SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR                                               PRESIDENT

              SMT.ASAMOL P.                                                          MEMBER

              SRI.AMPADY K.S.                                                        MEMBER

CC NO.69/2020

Between

Complainant                                    : Ansar H.A.,

                                                           Thekkeveedu,

                                                            Peermadu P.O., Idukki – 685 531.                                                                                                                                 

                                                           And

Opposite Party                               :1 . Reliance Jio Infocom Limited,

                                                             Office – 101, Sapharon,

                                                             Near Centre Point Panchavady 5  

                                                             Rastha  Ambavady,

                                                             Ahammadabad – 380 006, Gujarath.

                                                             (By Adv.Luxy T.A.)

                                                        2 . The Proprietor,

                                                              Varikkattu Communications,

                                                              Vandiperiyar, Idukki.

                                                              (By Adv.V.K.Beena)

                                                              

O R D E R

SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER

 

Complainant’s case is briefly discussed hereunder:-

 

1 . Complainant’s mobile phone number 9633430433  was ported to Jio network which is owned by first opposite party through second opposite party and currently he has been using the same.  Thus on 13/03/2020, he has purchased a plan of Rs.1299/- for 336 days through Mi Jio App as online transaction which was offered by first opposite party to customers and it was

(Cont.....2)

 

-2-

12000 minutes for calls and 24GB for internet.  Thereafter, he has purchased Add on plan of Rs.251/- which can be used for 51 days through Mi Jio App on 03/04/2020.  As per the ‘add on’ Plan, 2GB interest can be used along with the current plan.

2 . But, complainant could not use the benefits of “add on” plan.  Then, he has  contacted the customer care of first opposite party and he was informed that if there is a current plan for 336 days, he cannot get the benefits of ‘add on’ plan until ending of usage of such current plan.  While the plan was purchased through online, first opposite party did not inform about it.

3 . Complainant has intimated to opposite party that since the validity period of ‘add on’ plan up to 25/05/2020 and validity of base plan up to 12/02/2021, he cannot get the benefits of ‘add on’ plan.  Therefore, complainant has demanded either refund of money or granting the use of ‘add on’ plan after ending the usage of 24GB interest in base plan.  But, opposite parties didn’t take any steps to solve the problem.  Since the base plan was active, complainant was not allowed to use the ‘add on’ plan by opposite parties.  This is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.  Hence, he has prayed the following reliefs.

1.  Opposite parties may be directed to refund of Rs.251/-  as the price of add on plan.
2.   Also, opposite parties may be directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses and Rs.1000/- as compensation.

Upon notice from this Commission, first opposite party has entered to appearance and filed written version.  Notice of second opposite party was served.  But he didn’t appear before the Commission.  Hence he was set exparte.  The contentions of first opposite party are briefly discussed hereunder:-

(Cont.....3)

 

-3-

1 . Complaint filed by the complainant is frivolous and misconceived both in law and in facts.  That the contents in Paragraph No.1 of the complaint are accepted by the first opposite party.

2 . While recharging mobile with both these plans, the complainant was aware of the fact that, the Add on Plan, which is named as Work from Home Pack will be auto-activated only on the expiry of data allocation (24 GB) of his active validity of base plan (ie.1299).  Since, he had purchased Rs.251/-, “Work From Home” plan, through on line platform, the complainant had understood the terms and conditions of the same.  As an introductory offer, Rs.251/- plan was having 51 days validity, at that time.  While, the knowledge of the same is evident from the averments of the complainant, the complainant shall not be allowed to plead negligence regarding other terms and conditions of the plan.  There is no suppression from the part of the first opposite party.  As he had activated his 1299 plan having validity up to 366 days, his plan will expire only on 12/02/2021.  After exhausting his 24 GB data, earned by his 1299 plan, he had continued recharging through Add on Plans of Rs.251,151 and 51 as per his requirement up to 15/10/2020.

3 . From the recharging  history of the complainant, it is evident that, he understood his mistake and continued to utilize the facility of Add on Plan on regular intervals along with his original plan for 366 days.  Since, the complainant had purchased both his plans with open eyes and the first opposite party had updated all the terms and conditions of each plan on its website, the complainant shall not be allowed to plead ignorance of the same.  It is respectfully submitted that, till the complainant had ported out from the service of the first opposite party on 13/11/2020, he had enjoyed the services of the first opposite party.  These being the real facts, all the contentions to

(Cont.....4)

 

-4-

the contrary in the 2^nd to 4^th paragraphs of the complaint are specifically denied by the first opposite party.  The contention of the complainant that, the first opposite party had persuaded the complainant to utilize the benefit of both the plans within 51 days is specifically denied.  From the recharge history, it is evident that, he had not further recharged in 1299 plan and continued to recharge the Add on Plans.

4 . The first opposite party had offered these special plans to support its customers, during the time of Lock Down.  After availing the benefits of the plan, the complainant shall not be allowed to plead for the recovery of the amount expended by him, for availing the benefit.  So, the contention of the complainant that, the first opposite party had tried to earn unlawful gain during the period of lock down and caused monitory loss and mental agony are specifically denied by the first opposite party.

5 . Since, the service accepted by the complainant was not having any defect as alleged by him, the complainant had approached this Hon’ble Forum with untenable contentions, with an intention to get unlawful gain.  The complainant had not suffered any loss of money and had not suffered any mental agony from the actions of the opposite party and he is not entitled to recover any amount from the first opposite party as compensation.  There is no deficiency alleged by the complainant.  The complaint is not maintainable as against the first opposite party.  The complainant is not entitled to any relief as prayed for.  No cause of action has arisen against this opposite party.

Complainant has filed proof affidavit.  He was examined as PW1.  Exts.P1 and P2 were marked on the part of evidence of complainant.  1^st opposite party has produced 3 documents.  There were marked as Exts.R1 to R3.  2^nd opposite party was already set exparte.  No argument notes filed by

(Cont.....5)

 

-5-

both parties.  We have heard the case, thereafter it was taken for orders.  Now, the points which arise for consideration are:-

(a ) Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?

( b )  If so, what reliefs are entitled to the complainant ?

Points are considered together

We have gone through the evidence on records.   It is admitted by opposite party that complainant has purchased a plan of Rs.1,299/- for 336 days through ‘My Jio’ Mobile App and also he has purchased “work from home pack” Jio Prime plan of Rs.251/- for 51 days.  The allegation of complainant is that he couldn’t use data which was offered by opposite party from such prime plan.  Complainant was purchased this prime plan as add on plan for using sufficient data as additionally along with the base plan of 1,299/-.  According to complainant, when he was purchased this “add on plan” as per the terms and  conditions which was mentioned in Jio Mobile App, he believed that he can use data as additionally along with the base plan.  But it was not available, so complainant contacted opposite party and inform them about the non-availability of date from prime plan.  Complainant has produced the terms and conditions which he received from “My Jio Mobile App’ at the time of purchasing the ‘add on plan’.  It was marked as Ext.P2.  We have perused the documents.  It is mentioned in Ext.P2 that the subscriber must have an active prepaid/postpaid plan to avail the additional benefits offered under Jio Prime.  Complainant had already purchased a base plan for 336 days.  Accordingly, complainant should get additional benefits offered under such add on plan.   Complainant  alleges  that  he  couldn’t use

(Cont.....6)

 

-6-

 

only the data which is as per the ‘add on plan’.  But, there is no evidence adduced to prove that he didn’t use the data under such plan.    

Here, complainant was understood that the validity period of such add on plan is for 51 days and so he purchased it on 03/04/2020 ie, about a month after purchasing base plan for 336 days.  Therefore, he can be understand that before the expiry of base plan, add on plan would be expired.  We are of the opinion that normally, when the data or mobile plan was purchased, the validity period would be started from the time of purchasing it.  Accordingly, such add on plan data would start at the time of purchasing itself.  However, complainant has stated that he couldn’t use such data and thereafter it was expired by 51 days.  But, there is no evidence adduced to show that he could not use data as per such add on plan’.  Moreover, complainant deposed that he has purchased add on plan again and again after the expiry of such alleged add on plan and so he has used such data in 5 times along with his base plan of Rs.1,299/-.  At that time, he has no complaint against these all data plans.  He has admitted that he could use datas without any interruption under such plan in these 5 times also. Hence, we are of the considered view that if complainant could use the datas as per the add on plan which he was purchased in 5 times after the alleged plan, certainly such data as per the add on plan, which he was purchased at the first time can be used.  Moreover,

 

 

(Cont.....7)

 

 

-7-

there is no evidence that he could not use it.  As a result, complaint is dismissed without cost.

Extra copies to be taken back by parties without delay.

 Pronounced by this Commission on this the  13^th day of February, 2023.

                                                                                         Sd/-                                                                                  

                                                                                SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER                                                                                                                 

                                                                                                  Sd/-

                                                                        SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR, PRESIDENT                                                                                                    

                                                                                                  Sd/-

                                                                               SRI.AMPADY K.S., MEMBER

   

 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

PW1- Ansar

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1  -Work from Home pack

Ext.P2 – Work from Home Pack-Terms and Conditions

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Ext.R1 – Prepaid Plan vouchers – Terms and Conditions.

Ext.R2 – Jio Prepaid Plans -4G data voucher

Ext.R3 – Recharge History.

 

 

                                                                                               Forwarded by Order  

 

 

                                                                                          ASSISTANT REGISTRAR