Sri.Siddegowda, President 1. This complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the 1st Opposite party for a direction to stop the unnecessary service messages and to pay compensation of Rs.75,000/-. 2. The facts of the complaint are as follows; The complainant is a customer to the Spice Telecom of 1st Opposite party from 14.10.2006 having purchased simcard bearing No.9844566117 from 2nd Opposite party. On 22.03.2007, the complainant entered into 999 plan, according to which the complainant has one year incoming calls and 200 minutes out going calls for every month. Among 200 minutes calls, 100 spice to spice and another 100 minutes for every month up to one year. After completion of one year to continue the same plan, the complainant contacted the customer care center and as per advice of the customer care center, the complainant recharged Rs.100/- and sent a message VAL 30 to 50484 on 22.03.2008 and the 1st Opposite party sent the reply message that validity has been extended by 21.04.2008 as per your request. But, 1st Opposite party has not given 200 minutes out going calls, but charged 30 paise per call from spice to spice and 60 paise for other calls and also sending unnecessary messages daily up to 40-50 service messages. Though, the complainant tried to contact the spice customer care center about the said problem, but the connection was not available and on 01.04.2008, the complainant contacted the customer care center and informed said problem of not giving free calls before 10 days and also unnecessary messages like SORRY YOUR REQUEST CANNOT BE PROCESSED and his complaint was registered as No.41829302. After 3 days on 04.04.2008 again the complainant contacted the customer care center about the complaint, but the customer care center person gave evasive reply. On 10.04.2008, the complainant personally went to service center at Mysore and the person said that it will be solved shortly, but the problem was not solved at all. Again on 11.04.2008, the complainant contacted the customer care center and registered the complaint about the unnecessary messages, but no action was taken. The complainant is an advocate practicing at court and he has been suffering from mental agony due to unnecessary messages which are being sent by 1st Opposite party. Therefore, the present complaint is filed. 3. The notices were served on the 1st & 2nd Opposite parties, 1st Opposite party is the contesting Opposite party and has filed written version admitting that the complainant has purchased the simcard of the 1st Opposite party Company from 2nd Opposite party. It is admitted that 999 plan means the validity of the sim is for one year and during that period the customer need not pay the monthly rent. The 999 plan offer was given to the complainant for one year only from 22.03.2007, it provides 100 minutes spice to spice and another 100 minutes spice to other mobile for every month and thereafter for every month the complainant has to recharge it for further validity of one month. The Opposite party had changed 999 plan by making only 150 minutes calls free, out of which 100 minutes spice to spice and 50 minutes spice to other mobiles, after free minutes of 150 is utilized, the call charges will be charged. The said facility has been given to the complainant and utilized by the complainant. The same has been explained by the customer care to the complainant, in spite of which the complainant was giving complaints to the customer care. Even the said facts have been narrated to the complainant by the executives of the Opposite party. But, the complainant is taking advantage of being an practicing advocate with an intention to make wrongful gain. Though the complainant has registered the complaint before the customer care, but the executives have briefly explained the plan to the complaint. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite party. Opposite party has not received any notice from the complainant, if the notice is received, might have been misplaced by the executives and hence Opposite party has no personal knowledge of the notice. There is no cause of action and complaint is liable to be dismissed. 4. The 2nd Opposite party has admitted that the complainant purchased a Simcard on 14.10.2006 by entering into prepaid plan for two months. The other averments made in the complaint are not known and complaint against 2nd Opposite party has to be dismissed as there is no cause of action. 5. During trail, the complaint is examined and Ex.C.1 to C.3 are marked. On behalf of the 1st Opposite party one witness is examined. 6. We have heard both sides. 7. Now the points that arise for our considerations are:- 1) Whether the Opposite party has committed deficiency in service by sending unnecessary messages? 2) Whether the complainant is entitled to the compensation? 3) What order? 8. Our findings and reasons are as here under:- 9. POINT No.1:- The undisputed facts are that the complainant is the customer of 1st Opposite party spice communication from 14.10.2006 having purchased the simcard from 2nd Opposite party by paying Rs.350/- under prepaid plan for two months. Thereafter on 22.03.2007, the complainant opted for 999 plan in which 200 minutes calls are provided every month out of which 100 calls are spice to spice and another 100 calls from spice to other mobile up to one year. 10. According to the complainant, after the expiry of one year to continue the 999 plan, after contacting the customer care center of 1st Opposite party, he got recharged the sim for Rs.100/- and 1st Opposite party sent message to the effect validity has been extended by 21.04.2008 as per your request. But the Opposite party has disputed the same and according to the Opposite party, the complainant did not recharge on 22.03.2008, but recharged only on 01.04.2008. Though, the complainant has alleged and deposed that though the sim was recharged on 22.03.2008 for one month, the 1st Opposite party charged for 30 paise per call from spice to spice and 50 paise per call for other mobiles up to 01.04.2008 and the same was informed to the customer care center. But, there is no necessity to consider the said grievance, because the complainant has not prayed for any relief in that aspect. Further, when there is no prepaid plan or postpaid plan, there is no question of charging the amount by 1st Opposite party for outgoing calls made by the complainant. 11. The main grievance of the complainant is that 1st Opposite party is sending unnecessary messages, 40 to 50 times in a day and causing mental agony and disturbing the complainant being an advocate and in spite of contacting the customer care center and registering the complaint, no action was taken and hence the 1st Opposite party has committed deficiency in service, but 1st Opposite party has denied the same. 12. In the evidence, the complainant affirmed the same and he has produced Ex.C.1 the list of messages from 01.04.2008 till 27.07.2008 and it is not disputed by the 1st Opposite party. During this period totally 112 messages have been sent by 1st Opposite party. According to the complainant, from 23.03.2008 after recharging for Rs.100/-, there was no free outgoing calls, therefore, he tried to contact the customer care center, but was not available till 01.04.2008 and then he complained about receiving the unnecessary messages and about not providing free calls. Though purchased the sim on 23.03.2007 for one year, but the complainant has not produced any document for having recharged on 23.03.2008 and according to Opposite party on 01.04.2008, the mobile was recharged by the complainant. As per Ex.C.1 on 01.04.2008 at 10.03 a.m. the 1st Opposite party has sent message to the effect Dear Subscriber your request No. is 41829302 your request will be processed within 24 hours spice telecom. Next on the same day at 7.20 p.m. it is replied as Sorry your request cannot be processed, the same message has been sent so many times up to 27.07.2008. According to the witness of 1st Opposite party, the value added service number for the complainant is 484 and that on 01.04.2008, the reply has been sent to the request on 01.04.2008 and if the customer by mistake operates the sim code number or presses the button the computer will send the message for the same and the persons will not attend the automatic messages and according to her, it is not the unnecessary message, but it is a reply to the request made in the mobile and if at the night time a button is pressed of the earlier request, some times due to error of the computer when the system is rectified automatically, the reply will be sent through computer system to the customer in reply to their request. If we see Ex.C.1, the customer number is 484 and all the so called messages read Sorry your request cannot be processed, therefore if we consider Ex.C.1 even though reply has not been sent to the legal notice Ex.C.2, it cannot be accepted that 1st Opposite party has been sending unnecessary messages to the complainant, because network system operates on computer basis and not by personal attendants every time. Further, the receipt of the message will not cause any inconvenience to the customer, because it will not disturb to receive any call from out side or disturb the work as that of a call. Therefore, it appears that due to mistake operation of the key button of the mobile by the complainant, the computer system was sending the reply as mentioned in Ex.C.1 and not by 1st Opposite party staff, so as to cause inconvenience to complainant at the time of his work. Therefore, the complainant has failed to prove the deficiency of service by the 1st Opposite party and therefore, the complainant is not entitled to the compensation sought for. 13. In the result, we proceed to pass the following order; ORDER The complaint is dismissed. However, there is no order as to costs. (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum this the 25th day of September 2008). (PRESIDENT) (MEMBER) (MEMBER)
