BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KAMRUP, GUWAHATI
C.C.No- 63/2011
Present:
1)Md.Sahadat Hussain, A.J.S. - President
2)Smt. Archana Deka Lahkar. - Member
3)Sri Jamatul Islam - Member
Dr.Sarat Ch.Talukdar -Petitioner
S/o -Late Pitambar Talukdar
Resident of Lakhimi Nagar
Bye Lane No.1, House No.35
Near Lakhi Mandir, Beltola,
Guwahati-28,P.S.Dispur,
Dist: Kamrup, (M), Assam
-Vs-
1. Reliance Telecom Ltd. - Opp. party
Represented by its Managing Director,
having its registered Office at ‘H’ Block,
1st Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Knowledge City,
Navi Mumbai-400710
Maharastra , India
2. Ms.Tina Ghosh,
The Nodal Officer,
Reliance Telecom Ltd., 3rd Floor,
Mega Plaza,Christian Basti, G.S.Road,
Guwahati-781995,Kamrup, Assam.
3) Sri Bidyut Gogoi
Customer Care Executive
Reliance Telecom,Uttara Complex
Dr.Bhabendra Nath Saikia Lane,
Survey,Beltola,Guwahati-781028,Assam
Appearance:
Ld.advocate for the complainant-Mr.Hrishikesh Deka
Date of argument- 20.2.2018
Date of judgment- 8.3.2018
EXPARTE JUDGMENT
This is a complaint u/s 12 of the consumer Protection Act,1986.
1) The complaint filed by Dr. Sarat Ch.Talukdar against Reliance Telecom Ltd. and two others was admitted on 14.12.11 and notices was served on all the opp.parties and they also appeared in this proceeding, but they did not file the written statement and accordingly, this forum vide order dtd., 8.12.16 directed that the proceeding against the opp.parties will proceed on exparte. Thereafter, Ld.advocate Mr.Hrishikesh Deka filed exparte evidence and he also filed written argument and finally forwarded oral exparte argument on 20.2.18 and today we deliver the judgment which is as below-
2) The complainant case in brief is that he being retired from service in the year of 2007 as Asstt. Director of Department of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary was associated with various training programmes of the Government of Assam sponsored by World Bank and various N.G.O.s, had to travel outside state on several occasions for which he required portability mobile number and accordingly on 8.9.11 he applied for porting to his mobile to Airtel from Opp.Party No.1 (Reliance Telecom Ltd., Mumbai) and deposited porting charge of Rs.500/- and he also received a porting code No. EST 158961 through SMS from them as per Regulation 5 of Telecommunication Mobile Number Portability Regulation,2009, but on 10.9.2011, he received one SMS from the Airtel that his porting request was denied by Opp.Party No.1 for outstanding dues and then he sent one E.mail to Customer Care to Opp.Party No.1 stating inter-alia stating that he paid Rs.331/- in cash against bill dtd. 5.9.2011 on 7.9.2011, but as per bill dtd. 5.9.11 the amount was Rs.249/- and as such amount of Rs.64/- was credited in excess to his account which was admitted by the opp.party side and he also asked the oop.party side the reason for denial of his porting request despite having excess credited to his account and he, on 11.9.11, received a reply from the customer care of the opp.party through E.mail that they sincerely apologised for inconvenience caused to him and informed him that his request for porting (MNP) was in process, but that was not done by opp.parties; and then he sent one notice to Opp.Party No.1 requesting him for porting the mobile number, but no response found from Opp.Party No.1 also, and till today his mobile number has not been ported to Airtel by the opp.parties and hence prays for directing the opp.parties to pay him Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation.
3) We have perused the evidence adduced by the complainant. From evidence of the complainant, it appears to us that the complainant states that on 8.9.11, he had applied for porting of his mobile which was under the opp.party to Airtel, and he also deposited Rs.500/- to Opp.Party No.1 as porting charge and Opp.Party No.1 also gave a porting code vide No.ES 158961 to him through SMS, but on 10.9.11 he received one letter from Airtel that his porting request was denied by the Opp.Party No.1 for outstanding dues. Being aggrieved by the said message the complainant immediately sent one e-mail to the customer care of the Opp.Party No.1 company stating inter-alia that he paid Rs.313/- in cash against the bill dtd. 5.9.2011 on 7.9.11 on being informed by the Opp.Party No.3, the Customer Care Executive, as because he did not receive the said bill dtd. 5.9.11 at that relevant point of time. The complainant further stated in the said e-mail that on being talked with the officials of the Opp.Party No.1 company at Guwahati office, he came to know that his actual bill amount of bill dtd. 5.9.11 is Rs.249/- and as such an amount of Rs.64/- was credited in excess to his account which was also admitted by the said official. So, the complainant asked for a reply of his e.mail and the reason for denial of his porting request despite having credited excess to his account and there being no default on his part in making any payment to the service/access provider. On the next day i.e. on 11.9.2011, the complainant received a reply from the customer care, Reliance Communications Ltd. through e.mail whereby they sincerely apologized for the inconvenience caused to the complainant and also informed him that his request for porting (MNP) was under process, and requested to wait until the same is completed. So, the complainant was waiting bonafidely that his request for porting would be allowed by the Opp.Party No.1, and he would be able to activate his new SIM card provided by Airtel. Thereafter, having not received any positive response from the Opp.Party No.1 on 28.9.11, the complainant sent one notice to the Opp.Party No.1 narrating all the incidents regarding not allowing of his porting request as aforesaid and also demanded for effecting the porting of his number alongwith a written explanation as to why he was falsely accused of not clearing the dues, failing which the appropriate legal action would be initiated. The copies of the said notices were also sent to the Opp.Party Nos. 2 & 3 but till date the opp.parties neither replied nor effected the porting of the complainant. As such being aggrieved by such utter negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties the complainant was constrained to file the instant complaint before this Hon’ble Forum.
His statement is supported by documents ranging from Ex.1 to Ex 12. Thus, it is proved that after receiving request for porting from the complainant and even after receiving due charge for porting from the complainant the opp.party has not ported his mobile which is 98640-67483 to Airtel disobeying the instruction given in Telecommunication Mobile Number Portability Regulation 2009. Therefore, we hold that this inaction on the part of the opp.parties is a clear case of deficiency of service towards the complainant.
Secondly, it is also found that the complainant is a retired veterinary expert of Government of Assam, who has to attend so many training programmes etc. held by Government of Assam and some N.G.O.,s and for not porting his mobile to Airtel by opp.parties, he has to face difficulties in participating in the said programmes which resulted in his professional loss as well as loss of esteem. Therefore, the opp.party side is liable to pay sufficient compensation for causing such loss to him . Looking into above circumstances we are of opinion that the opp.parties are liable to pay the complainant Rs.20,000/- as compensation for such deficiency of service and Rs.5,000/- as cost of proceeding.
4) Summing up above discussion we hold that the complainant has a prima facie case against the opp.parties , which the complainant has succeeded to prove. So, the case against the opp.parties i.e. Reliance Telecom Ltd., Ms.Tina Ghosh, Nodal Officer of Reliance Telecommunication and Sri Bidyut Gogoi , Customer Care Executive of Reliance Telecom Ltd. is allowed on exparte and they are directed to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant for causing deficiency of service towards him i.e. not porting his mobile which was originally under them to Airtel and also Rs. 5,000/- as cost of proceeding, to-which, all the opp.parties are severally liable. The opp.parties are directed to pay the awarded amounts within 45 days , in default, they have to pay interest @ 12 % per annum, from this day.
Given under our hands and seal of this forum on this day 8th March, 2018.
Free copies of judgment be delivered to the party.
(Smt .A.D.Lahkar) (Sri Jamatul Islam) (Md.S.Hussain) .
Member Member President
