BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

 Complaint No.145 of 2017

      Date of Instt. 10.05.2017

      Date of Decision: 11.02.2020

Satinder Kapoor wife of Sh. Pushpinder Kapoor resident of 15, Tagore Nagar, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

1.       The Corporate Office Connect Broadband, Quadrant Televentures Ltd. (Foremerly known as HFCL Infotel Ltd.) B-71, Phase-VI, Industrial Focal Point, Mohali-160055.

2.       Sale Manager of Connect Broadband, Quadrant Televentures Ltd. KM Stone 8, G. T. Road, Pragpur, Jalandhar.

….….. Opposite Parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Sh. Karnail Singh           (President)

Smt. Jyotsna                   (Member)

Present:       None for the Complainant.

Sh. A. S. Sohal, Adv. Counsel for the OPs No.1 & 2.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1.                This complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that        the complainant is having one Broadband Connection bearing Telephone No.0181-5029632 in the name of the complainant installed at 15, Tagore Nagar, Near Sehani Palace Road, GPO, Jalandhar. The said connection of the complainant was disconnected by the OPs w.e.f. 11.11.2016 and since then the complainant had not got restored the above said connection from the office of OPs as at present the complainant is not in need of Internet Broadband connection and consequence of which the complainant had made written request to the office of the OP No.1 and had sent that request to their office through registered post, both are dated 22.11.2016. While requesting them to consider the above said broadband connection as disconnected w.e.f. the disconnection date i.e. 11.11.2016 and postal receipts dated 22.11.2016 are placed on the file.

2.                That the staff of the OP No.2 had visited the house of the complainant on 15.12.2016 and had received a sum of Rs.2400/- as full and final payment, which was the payment of dues upto the date of disconnection i.e. 11.11.2016 and at that time of giving receipt, the staff of the OP No.2 on behalf of OP No.1 had given written acknowledgement to the complainant that the attendant of the OPs will visit the house of the complainant in order to bring back the accessories such as modem etc. It is utter surprise for the complainant that the office of OPs is still issuing bills to the complainant and making demand of payment of dues of non-use of internet services from the very first connection i.e. 11.11.2016 as such despite the present complaint, the complainant deserves her right being a lady to prosecute both the OPs. The acts of the OPs are glaring case of negligence in the manner of performance as the connection has already been disconnected about five months ago and in those five months, the complainant had not only used the internet services of the OPs and the OPs surprisingly are sending false payment of bills to the complainant. The act and conduct of the OPs is clear cut case of deficiency in service and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to pay the amount of Rs.50,000/- alongwith a sum of Rs.1,10,000/- for causing mental agony harassment and legal expenses in the interest of justice.

3.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs and accordingly, OPs appeared through its counsel and filed a joint written reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable in its present form and as such, the same is liable to be dismissed. The present complaint has been filed with a malafide intention to harass the answering OP. It is further averred that the complainant has not come with clean hands before this Forum and as such, the complaint deserves to be dismissed and further submitted that the complainant billing cycle is 01-30 of every month and the complainant paid the bill upto 30.09.2016, but she never paid the rest of bill from 01.10.2016 to 31.10.2016 and 01.11.2016 to 30.11.2016. The complainant issued notice for disconnection 22.11.2016 and bill generated on 01.12.2016 and on 15.12.2016 she paid the amount of Rs.2400/- instead of Rs.3426/- for bill dated 01.12.2016 and the company waived of Rs.1026/- and the company issued full and final payment till bill of 30.11.2016 on the assurance of the complainant to return the internet Wi-Fi router alongwith disconnection letter and ID-Proof of the complaint within 2 days, but the complainant neither returned the internet Wi-Fi router nor applied for the disconnection of the Wi-Fi connection installed on the complainant’s address till date and the connection of the complainant continued till March-2017 and it was automatically disconnected in April-2017 due to non-payment of bills for the month of December, January and February of amounting of Rs.4577/-. It is further submitted that if the complainant return the accessories i.e. router, adopter, splitter etc. alongwith ID-Proof and signed the disconnection letter, then the OPs waive all the dues till date. It is further alleged that the complainant has got no cause of action to file the present complaint. So, on this score alone, this complaint is liable to be dismissed. On merits, it is admitted that a connection was provided to the complainant, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

4.                In order to prove his case, the complainant alongwith her counsel tendered into evidence her own affidavit Ex.CA alongwith some documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-3 and closed the evidence.

5.                Similarly, counsel for the OPs tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.OP1 & 2/A and closed the evidence.

6.                We have heard the argument from learned counsel for the OPs as none has come present on behalf of the complainant and also gone through the case file very minutely.

7.                There is no dispute that internet connection was provided by the OP to the complainant and as per version of the complainant, he submitted an application on 11.11.2016 for disconnection of the internet connection. Copy of the said application is not brought on the file by the complainant or OP, rather the OP admitted in its reply that on 22.11.2016 a notice for disconnection of internet connection, was given by the complainant and also paid Rs.2400/- and copy of the said notice alongwith postal receipts is available on the file Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2. When the complainant informed the OP that his connection be disconnected w.e.f. 11.11.2016, then it presume that the connection of the complainant is to be disconnected from that very date and after that date, the OP has no right to claim any charges for the use of the internet connection, but even then the OPs are sending the bill to the complainant after that period, which are very much available on the file for the period 01.11.2016 to 30.11.2016 for amounting to Rs.3576/-, which is illegal and for that the complainant is not liable to pay the same because she has already got disconnected her connection.

8.                Further, the OP alleged that the complainant miserably failed to return the accessories of the internet connection i.e. Wi-Fi router, adopter, splitter etc. and further alleged in written reply that if the complainant return the said accessories, then the OPs will waive all the dues till date. So, accordingly, we find that there is no direct or indirect negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, rather both are negligent, for the reason the complainant is not ready to return the accessories of the connection and due to that reason, the OPs are sending the bill for further period just to put a pressure upon the complainant to return the said accessories. So, under these circumstances, we do not find any negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and as such, the complainant is not entitled for any compensation or litigation expenses. However, in the interest of justice, the complaint of the complainant is disposed of with a direction to the complainant to return the accessories of the internet connection to the OP and in lieu of that the OP will waive all the dues till date and accordingly, matter is decided. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

9.                Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated                                       Jyotsna                           Karnail Singh

11.02.2020                                        Member                          President