J u d g e m e n t
Fact of the case in Brief :- The Complainant is Senior (Advocate) Legal Practioner of Nuapada being attracted by the advertisement of the OP BSNL India Ltd. He is a subscriber of BSNL mobile Vide SIM No.9437125984 for more than ten years. As per advertisement of BSNL in print media the OP claim of good internet service provider. The complainant has activated a Net Pack Rs.155 from 116502 on dated 25.06.2015 at 06.28.17 P.M from that day of recharge the Internet service is not at all available over his mobile, it come for a few second, the speed is very low as a result the complainant not only spend money but also his practice is also at the same time affected as he could not work due to failure of Internet service of his Mobile. As the complaint petition shows at Nuapada the service of BSNL is very poor the absence of other Network at Nuapada, The choice is one that is BSNL.
The complaint has made a plea that when the Prime Minister of India talk about Digital India, The Local employee of BSNL make it a Mockery Practically, Due to failure of Internet service the complaint suffer a lot and alleged for a compensation of Rs.30,000 towards deficiency in service ,Rs. 5000/- ( Rupees Five thousand)only towards cost of litigation and refund of Rs.155 for the Internet pack recharge.
The complainant has filed his alleged petition along with an affidavit for the deficiency in service of the Internet Service, Provided by BSNL India Ltd (The OP). The opposite party appeared before the Forum with his Counsel on dated 01.09.2015 , filed V.NAMA and filed version on dated 22.03.2016.
The OP has admitted that the recharge of Internet voucher and denied the deficiency in service of the Internet service provided by the BSNL (OP). The WiMax Network, Broadband Internet service of the OP is works properly and provide better service to the people of Nuapada district without any disturbances. The petitioner/complainant has falsely alleged his complaint petition before the Forum. The OP has never harassed the petitioner intentionally and the present petition has never received by mental agony and wastage of time call money. The claim for compensation of the complainant in this case is exaggerated at exorbitant. The petitioner has never approached the OP by any written complaint, hence the claim of compensation is baseless and afterthought. The OP has filed an affidavit along with his written version.
After vividly observation of the record like the petition of the petitioner and version of the opposite party the Hon’ble Forum has come to a conclusion that the complainant in this case has rightly filed this petition before the Forum. Being aggrieved by the disruption of Internet service and network problem the complainant. The Forum has after hearing and argument of both the parties the Hon’ble Forum has order the opposite party as follows.
O R D E R
The OPs( B.S.N.L.) has directed to resume regular internet service through his own network to his subscriber of Nuapada without any interruption ,If any machinery defect required for the its maintenance and repairing. The Op BSNL has to repair as early as possible within two month for the subscriber of Nuapada district .
And in the present case he has to pay Rs. 10,000/- ( Rupees ten thousand)only to the complainant towards harassment and pay Rs. 1,000/-( One thousand) only towards litigation fees as the complainant is a legal practitioner, In total Rs. 11,000/-( Rupees Eleven thousand) only within two (2) months from the date of receipt the judgement, failing which the OP has to pay 12% interest per annum above the amount of Rs. 11,000/-( Rupees eleven) only.
Judgement pronounced in the Open Court of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nuapada, this the 6th day of December 2016.
