IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Saturday the 28th day of February, 2015.
Filed on 12..11..2012
Present
- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
- Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
C.C.No.388/2012
between
Complainant:- Opposite Party:-
Smt.Sibi Sudheesh M/s.Tata Tele Services Ltd.
W/o Sudheesh V.Sebastian S.L.Plaza, Palarivattom
Proprietor, Archana Silks Rep. by its Branch Manager
Ambalappuzha, Alappuzha. (By Adv.Varghese John)
M.C.Road, Chengannur
Mavelikkara
Residing at Valiya Veettil
Thittamel, Chengannur.
(By Adv.Charle Isaac)
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The complainant has filed this complaint before the Forum on 12.11.2012 alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The brief facts of the allegations of the complainant are as follows:-
The complainant is a subscriber of the opposite party from 2007 onwards and having 4 telephone connections. The payment of bill for the said connections was effected by way of account payee cheque issued in the opposite party’s name. While so, for the payment of bill dtd. 27.07.2012 for an amount of Rs.2175/-, the complainant sent a cheque dtd.10.08.2012 to the opposite party on 04.08.2012 through courier. Though it was accepted by the opposite party, it was returned to the complainant without producing the said cheque for encashment and also without assigning any reason. When the complainant contacted to the customer care service of the opposite party they directed the complainant to send the cheque and accordingly the complainant sent a cheque on 14.08.2012 through courier. But on 15.09.2012 the opposite party disconnected the complainant’s 4 telephone connections without any reason. The complainant is running a textile shop, M/s.Archana Silks, she suffered much mental agony, hardships, and financial loss due to the act of the opposite party as the customers and suppliers were not able to contact the complainant. Thereafter the complainant remitted the bill amount including delayed payment charges directly to the opposite party‘s office at Alappuzha on 22.09.2012. Further on 12.10.2012 the opposite party encashed the said cheque for an amount of Rs.2175/- and thereby effected double payment for the same bill. Hence the complainant filed the complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party claiming compensation.
2. Version of the opposite party is as follows:
The complaint is not maintainable. It is further submitted that any cheque received without due particulars for remittance of bill shall not be accepted by the company. The opposite party further stated that the payment has to be made with details of subscribed connections, account No. and the like. The cheque has been duly returned to the complainant. There is no business loss as alleged by the complainant. The complainant is bound to pay the usage charges as per the bill to enjoy uninterrupted service. The complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The disconnection happened due to the negligence of the complainant in not furnishing the required documents and due to not making payment. Since the alleged loss has been occurred due to the negligence of the complainant and therefore the complainant does not have the right to claim compensation and the complainant may be dismissed.
3. The complainant was examined as PW1 and the documents produced were marked
as Exts.A1 to A7. No documents were produced on the side of the opposite party. Considering the allegations of the complainant and contentions of the opposite party, the Forum has raised the following issues for consideration.
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get compensation and cost from the
opposite party?
4.Issues 1 and 2 may be considered:
According to the complainant the opposite party disconnected the service on 15.09.2012
when the cheque for the bill amount was already sent to the opposite party on 14.08.2012 through courier and the same was accepted by the opposite party. Since the complainant has no other option to make the connection live the complainant directly paid the bill amount along with delayed payment charges at the office of the opposite party. Thereafter the opposite party encashed the same cheque (ie. the cheque sent to the opposite party on 14.08.2012) on 12.10.2012 and thereby effecting double payment for the same bill.
5. Complainant has filed proof affidavit in support of her case and produced
documents which were marked as Exts.A1 to A7. Ext.A1 is the power of attorney executed by the complainant in favour of her husband Sudheesh. Ext.A2 is the copy of bill dtd. 27.07.2012 for the period from 25.06.2012 to 28.07.2012 for an amount of Rs.2175/- for 4 different telephone connections. Ext.A3 is the original receipt dtd. 04.08.2012 issued by professional couriers. Ext.A4 is the original receipt dtd. 14.08.2012 issued by the same couriers. Ext.A5 is the bank account statement dtd. 12.10.2012 issued by the Corporation Bank, Chengannur. Ext.A6 is the legal notice dtd.25.09.2012. Ext.A7 is the postal receipt.
6. Highlighting the point put forward by the complainant for alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party is that they disconnected the complainant’s 4 telephone connections when the cheque for the bill amount was with the opposite party. And also the same cheque was encashed after the remittance of bill amount by the complainant directly at the office of the opposite party and thereby effected double payment for the same bill. From Ext.A4 it can be seen that the complainant sent the cheque on 14.08.2012. Admittedly the opposite party disconnected the telephone connections on 15.09.2012. Therefore at the time of disconnecting the service, the bill amount was with the opposite party and the same cheque was encashed on 12.10.2012 which is evident from Ext.A5. So it is clear that the cheque which was sent by the complainant was with due particulars. Hence the allegation of the complainant that the opposite party disconnected the services on 14.09.2012 when the bill amount with the opposite party was undoubtedly proved. When the power of attorney holder of the complainant was cross-examined, he deposed that the reconnection was got on the same day that the bill amount paid directly at the office of the opposite party. So it is admitted that the bill the complainant paid bill amount directly to the office of the opposite party. We have gone through the evidence on record we finds that the allegations put forward by the complainant against the opposite party is genuine. Since the opposite party disconnected the service after accepting the cheque for the bill amount sent by the complainant, it amounts to deficiency in service. The complainant is fully entitled to get an amount of Rs.2175/- which was encashed by the opposite party on 12.10.2012 after remitting the bill amount by the complainant. Since the opposite party has committed deficiency in service, the complainant is also entitled to get compensation and cost. Even though the complainant claimed for a compensation of Rs.30,000/- nothing was brought in evidence to prove that such and such loss has been sustained by her. In view of the above findings the complaint is allowed accordingly. Hence the complaint is allowed accordingly.
In the result, the complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to refund the amount of Rs.2175/- (Rupees two thousand one hundred and seventy five only) with 9% interest from 12.10.2012 till realization. The opposite party is also directed to pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) towards compensation to the complainant and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards cost. The order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and pronounced in Open Forum on this the 28th day of February, 2015.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
Appendix:-
PW1 - Sudheesh V.Sebastian
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Copy of power of attorney.
Ext.A2 - Copy of bill dtd. 27.07.2012.
Ext.A3 - Original receipt dtd. 04.08.2012.
Ext.A4 - Original receipt dtd. 14.08.2012.
Ext.A5 - Bank account statement dtd. 12.10.2012.
Ext.A6 - Legal notice dtd.25.09.2012.
Ext.A7 - Postal receipt.
Evidence of the opposite party:- Nil
-//True copy//-
By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/SF
Typed by: pg/-
Compd.By:pr/-
