IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Monday the 30th day of August, 2010
Filed on 11.05.10
Present
- Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
- Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
- Smt. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.105/10
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Sri.Gopakumar.B, 1. Tata Tele Services Ltd.,
Mithun Stores, Rep. by its Head, Manish,
Puthu Purackal House, SL Plaza, Palarivattom, Kochi.
Kanichanallur,
Muttom.P.O., 2. Friends Communications,
Haripad. (Authorized Business Associates of Tata Tele
(By Adv.Deepa Stenet) Services Ltd.), Rep by its Head, Sathikumar,
Park Jn: (Opp:PWD rest house), Mavelikkara.
O R D E R
SRI.K.ANIRUDHAN (MEMBER)
Sri.Gopakumar.B has filed this complaint before the Forum on 11.05.10 alleging deficiency in service on the side of the opposite parties. The allegations of the complainant are as follows:- Inorder to install a PCO at his business place he contacted with the 2nd opposite party in connection with the installation of the smart PCO and thus from March 2008. He was a consumer of the company named ‘Tata Indicom’ Smart PCO and that the 2nd opposite party had provide to him the Smart PCO facility having equipment model No.SXT 2080 BHOEO 50150, with ESN No.071 C8FCC, bearing No.9287625204. At the time of installation of the said equipment, 2nd opposite party collected a sum of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) and the 2nd opposite party had made him believe and convinced him in taking the connection. At the time taking the connection, the 2nd opposite party has assured him that the amount to payback since the same was deposited amount and further assured that the amount will be returned when the connection was intented to be discontinued.
1. Later on when he found that the connection is not profitable to him, he decided to discontinue its connection. Then he approached the 2nd opposite party for a disconnection and hence on 09.03.2009, the facility was disconnected by him after surrendering, the equipment from him and he had issued an Equipment Return Note, bearing No.12237 on 09.03.2009, and requested the 2nd opposite party to return the deposited amount of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) to him. He contacted at the 2nd opposite party to get back the deposited amount. But the 2nd opposite party informed him that the amount will be returned to him without delay.
2. But till the date there is no refund of the money by the 2nd opposite party. The 2nd opposite party had requested him to give a short period for settlement. On 10.03.2010 a legal notice was sent to the opposite parties for the said amount. Since there is no positive approach on the part of the opposite parties, complaint is filed before the Forum seeking relief.
3. Notice was issued to the opposite parties from the Forum. They have accepted the notice. But they have not cared to appear before the Forum inorder to state the reason of the deniel of the return of deposited amount. Considering the absence of the opposite parties this Forum declared them as exparte on 15.07.2010 and proceeded the matter.
4. considering the allegations of the complainant this Forum has raised the following issues for consideration are:-
a) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in return the deposited amount?
b) Whether the complainant is entitled to get the compensation from the opposite parties?
c) Other reliefs?
Issues 1 to 3
5. The complainant has filed proof affidavit in support of his case along with the 4 documents in evidence. Ext. A1 to A4 were marked. Ext.A1 is the Equipment Return Note prepared by the opposite party and given to the complainant. It shows that the details of PCO and the DEL No.9287625204 dated, 09.03.2008 and the said Equipment Return Note shows that the acceptance of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) by the opposite parties which is to be refund amount. Ext.A2 is the Advocate Notice sent by the complainant to the 1st opposite party, requesting to return the deposited amount within 7 days. Ext. A3 and A4 are the postal receipts and the acknowledgment card.
6. We have perused the entire matter, of this case and verified the documents produced by the complainant in evidence. It is alleged that at the time of taking this connection and its installation of the equipment, the 2nd opposite party had collected a cash amount of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) from the complainant as deposited amount and the 2nd opposite party assured that the said deposited amount will be refunded at the time of disconnection of the said equipment. Since the business of the complainant with the help of this connection is not profitable, he decided to disconnect the equipment and surrender the equipments to the opposite parties.
7. In this connection it is to be noticed that the 2nd opposite party had not returned the deposited amount to the complainant. He contacted the opposite parties for the said deposited amount. But the opposite party denied on payment to the complainant. On reading the entire facts of this case the opposite parties are bound to repay the deposited amount of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) to the complainant, since the complainant had surrendered the connection along with the equipments to the opposite party. On several occasion the opposite parties willfully denied the deposited amount. All the facts of the case shows that the opposite parties are not shown any earnest attempt to repay the deposited amount to the complainant. In the Equipment Return Note (Ext.A1) shows that the amount of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) is to be refund. There is no justification on the part of the opposite parties to deney the release of the deposited amount to the complainant since he was a bonafide customer. The opposite parties fully bound to release the deposited amount to the complainant.
8. The whole actions of the opposite parties shows that by way of denial of the repayment of deposited amount to the complainant, the opposite parties have committed dereliction of duty and there is latches on their side. It is to be further noticed that even though the opposite parties have accept the notice of this Forum, the opposite parties have not shown any interest to appear before this Forum, for stating the reasons for this matter. This shows the irresponsible attitude of the opposite parties in this transaction. The whole actions of the opposite parties are unauthorized, illegal and arbitrary. The complainant is fully entitled to get back of the amount of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) from the opposite parties. Since there is deficiency of service and negligence on the side of the opposite parties by way of purposeful denial of the payment, the complainant is entitled to get the compensation and cost from the opposite parties.
9. All the issues are found in favour of the complainant. Hence this complaint is to be allowed as prayed for. So we hereby direct the opposite parties to return the deposited amount of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) to the complainant with 12% interest from 09.03.2009 to till the date of realization of the entire amount and further direct that the opposite parties to pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) to the complainant for his mental agony, sufferings, physical strain and loss, due to the grossest deficiency of service latches and negligence on the part of the opposite parties, by way of purposeful denial of the repayment of the deposited amount to the complainant in time, and further pay an amount of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) as cost of this proceedings.
We further direct that the opposite parties shall pay the said amounts to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and further ordered that the complainant is free to proceed against the assets of the opposite parties for the realization of the said amount.
The complaint is allowed accordingly.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of August, 2010.
Sd/-Sri. K. Anirudhan
Sd/-Sri. Jimmy Korah
Sd/-Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext. A1 - The Equipment Return Note dated, 09.03.08 for an amount of Rs.1,500/-
Ext. A2 - The copy of the Advocate Notice dated, 10.03.10
Ext.A3 - The Postal Receipt
Ext.A4 - The Acknowledgment Card
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F.
Typed by:- k.x/-
Compared by:-
