IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Thursday, the 30th day of October, 2014.
Filed on 24..06..2014
Present
- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
- Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
C.C.No.162/2014
between
Complainant:- Opposite Party:-
Sri.Thomas Johnson M/s.TATADOCOMO OFFICE
Ayyanadu House Near Iron Bridge
Opp. Udaya Studio Alappuzha.
Pathirapally P.O.
Alappuzha.
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The brief facts of the complainant are as follows:
The complainant availed a net connection on 16.08.2013 from the opposite party. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.2,500/- for a period of three months. But, before the said period itself, the complainant informed the opposite party to cancel the said net connection as he is not getting the net work speed as assured by the opposite party and the opposite party orally promised to do so. But, after one month of the said period without using the net connection, the complainant got a bill for Rs.920/- from the opposite party. When the complainant contacted the opposite party, the opposite party told that it was due to the delay caused in cancelling the net connection and forced him to remit the bill amount. The next month also the complainant got bill from the opposite party. When contacted the opposite party, they informed the complainant not to pay this bill amount as it was not used. But, thereafter the complainant is getting many phone calls from the opposite party, Ernakulam Branch for settling the bill amount, otherwise they will initiate legal proceedings against the complainant. Hence filed this complaint seeking the following reliefs:-
- To direct the opposite party to repay the bill amount of Rs.920/- with 15% of interest
- To pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- as he was not getting the network speed as offered by the opposite party.
- To pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- towards cost of the proceedings.
(2) Notice was served to the opposite party, but they did not appear before this Forum. Hence the opposite party was set ex parte.
(3) The complainant was examined as PW1 and documents Exts.A1 to A3 were marked and the material object was marked as MO1.
(4) Considering the allegation of the complainant, the Forum has raised the following issues for consideration:-
(i) Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
(ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for?
(5) Issues 1 and 2: Issues 1 and 2 can be considered together. The specific case of the complainant is that he availed a net connection from the opposite party on 16.08.2013 for a period of three months and he paid an amount of Rs.2,500/- for the said period. But, before the expiry of the said period, itself, the complainant informed the opposite party to cancel the said network connection. But after the said period, the complainant was charged a bill of Rs.920/- without using the net connection. Subsequently also he was getting bills from the opposite party, even though he was not availing any service from the opposite party.
(6) Ext.A1 is the letter from the opposite party dtd. 19.08.2013, from which it can be seen that the complainant availed a net connection from the opposite party. Ext.A2 is the customer acknowledgement copy, from which it can be seen that an intimation was given to the opposite party on 30.01.2014 to cancel the said net connection. Ext.A3 is the copy of the bill dtd. 13.01.2014 for an amount of Rs.920/-. From the document produced by the complainant, it is evident that the complainant availed a net connection from the opposite party on 16.08.2013. Even though the complainant informed the opposite party orally to cancel the said net connection, but from the documents, it is only on 30.01.2014, the complainant had intimated the opposite party regarding the cancellation of the said net connection. Highlighting the points contended by the complainant for deficiency in service is that he was charged a bill of Rs.920/ dtd. 13.01.2014 (Ext.A3) , without availing any service from the opposite party and subsequently also he was getting bills from the opposite party. Ext.A3 bill was issued to the complainant on 13.01.2014, but he registered a request to cancel the said net connection (Ext.A2) is on 30.01.2014 ie. after getting the bill. So we cannot direct the opposite party to repay the bill amount of Rs.920/- as prayed for. The complainant further contended that he was getting bills subsequently. But nothing was produced before this Forum. The complainant also claimed an amount of Rs.10,.000/- towards compensation as network connection has not getting the speed as assured by the opposite party. Admittedly the complainant availed the net connection on 16.08.2013 for a period of three months. But the complaint is filed after the expiry of the said period (24.06.2014) ie. after availing the service from the opposite party. Hence we cannot find any deficiency in service of the part of the opposite party.
In the light of the above discussion, we cannot find any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence the complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of October, 2014.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 – Thomas Johnson (Witness)
Ext. A1 - Letter dtd. 19.08.13 issued by the opposite party to the complainant.
Ext. A2 - Copy of customer acknowledgement dtd: 30.01.14.
Ext. A3 - Copy of bill dtd. 13.01.2014 for an amount of Rs.920/-.
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
-//True copy//-
By Order,
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/SF
Typed by: Pg/-
Compd by:
