DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD
Dated this the 30th day of January 2017
Present : Smt.Shiny.P.R. President
: Smt.Suma.K.P. Member Date of filing: 11/01/2016
: Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
(C.C.No.1/2016)
Gangadharan,
11/254, Parakkalam House,
Pallassena – 678 505
Palakkad District - Complainant
(By Adv.K.Sureshkumar)
V/s
The General Manager
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
Palakkad Telecom District
T.B.Road, Palakkad - Opposite party
(By Adv.P.K.Devadas)
O R D E R
By Smt.Shiny.P.R. President.
Brief facts of complaint.
The complainant is a consumer of the opposite party as per I.D.4013802166 A/c No.9027651195 Land Phone No.04923-268238 under Pallassena Exchange. The complainant submitted that he is regularly paying the phone bill without any fault. The above telephone is out of order from 5.10.2015 onwards. The complainant had made several complaints before the concerned authorities through automatic telephone complaint booking service and also in person but so far they have not taken any steps to cure the defect in the land phone. Due to non functioning of the land phone the complainant has purchased a new land phone and installed and even after that the telephone was not in a working condition. When the complainant contacted the opposite party they told that the underground cable line is defective they could not identify the defect or locate the spot. Even after the non functioning of the telephone the opposite party issued telephone bills and the complainant paid all the bill.
The complainant being an Advocate faced tremendous mental agony and loss due to non functioning of the telephone. The complainant further submitted that he is ready to surrender the telephone connection in such a situation and he is entitled to get the refund of deposited amount with interest from the date of deposit. The complainant sent a Regd. legal notice to the opposite party on 5/11/2015 to redress his grievances. After receiving the notice the opposite party did not take any steps to redress the grievance of the complainant. The act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.
Hence the complainant prays for an order directing the opposite party to refund the deposited amount with interest to the complainant alongwith Rs.10,000/- as compensation for the heavy loss and mental agony sustained by him.
Complaint was admitted and issued notice to opposite party. Opposite party entered appearance and filed version contending the following:
Opposite party admits that the complainant is a subscriber of Telephone No.04923-268238 and that the complainant had lodged his complaint. Opposite party contended that the complainant’s telephone works from Pallassana Exchange, booked complaint was cleared by attending cable pair fault in 50 pair cable along Karipode road from Chirakode junction to Pallimokku. At Pallassana exchange only on TM is available for outdoor and indoor works. During October 2015, due to heavy lightening at Nemmara, Pallassana Adiperanda, Padagiri and Koduvayur Exchange the number of faults including C,D,E customers and for more than 30 days fault were very high. During this season, the number of petty contractors also was very less due to Panchayath elections.
On December 14th also heavy lightening occurred almost for one hour at Nemmara, Pallassana, Koduvayur exchange areas. At Nemmara, DSLAM and Wi-max equipment went faulty and so many important numbers also were fault. Hence petty contract labourers were not available for attending F, G class faults.
The complainant’s telephone is working from a 50 pair cable which is about 1.5 km from Chirakkode junction to Pallimokku Mini Pillar. From this 20 pair cable for about 1 km up to Parakkalam and 5 pair cable for 100 M up to DP (Distribution point) near sub office. All these cables are damaged by different works like Jalanidhi and Karippode road widening work and some portion are under the tarred area including joints are not traceable. Hence fault clearance was done by changing the cable pair. The 50 pair cables had six joints and 20 pair joints had five joints. Out of these joints only four joints were traceable. There are some more connections which are fault has to be attended.
On 18/01/2016 the complainant’s telephone fault has been cleared and verified in the sub office. Rent rebate has also been recommended for the complainant’s telephone from 1/10/2015 to 31/12/2015. This can be availed by the complainant by applying for it.
If the complainant wants to surrender the telephone connection and instrument he can follow the procedure for reimbursement and get the deposited amount if any. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The complainant is not entitled to get any compensation as claimed in the complaint. No mental agony and loss is caused to the complainant as alleged.
Hence complaint is to be dismissed with cost.
Evidence of the complainant consists of his chief affidavit and Ext A1 to A3 documents. Opposite party filed their chief affidavit.
The following issues are considered
1.Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party ?
2.If so, what is the relief?
Issues 1 & 2
Opposite party admits that the complainant is a subscriber of Telephone No.04923-268238 and that the complainant had lodged his complaint. The allegation of the complainant is that complainant’s telephone is out of order from 5.10.2015 onwards. Ext A2 shows usage charge is ‘0’. From this it is clear that telephone was not working during the month of October & November. Even after the non functioning of the telephone the opposite party issued telephone bills and the complainant paid that bill amount. Opposite party admitted this fact in their version. Opposite party further contended that on 18/01/2016 the complainant’s telephone fault has been cleared. In the version of opposite party they submitted that rent rebate has also been recommended for the complainant’s telephone from 1/10/2015 to 31/12/2015. As the complainant did not produce the bill for the month of December, we cannot direct opposite party to refund the bill for the month of December. However, the complainant is at liberty to apply before the opposite party to refund the bill amount which was paid for the month of December. In the above circumstances we are of the view that complainant being an advocate non functioning of the telephone will definitely cause a lot of mental agony and financial loss. By Issuing bill without giving proper service to consumers, opposite party committed deficiency in service. So the opposite has the liability to refund the bill amount of Rs 343 (for the month of October - November) along with compensation to the complainant. At the time of argument opposite party submitted that the complainant has surrendered the phone connection and received the deposited amount.
Under the above circumstances we partly allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to refund Rs.343/- (Rupees Three hundred and forty three only) towards the bill amount for the month of October and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) as compensation for mental agony along with Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost of proceedings. And also complainant is at liberty to apply before the concerned office for refund of the bill amount which was paid for the month of December.
Order shall be complied within a period of one month from the date of receipt of order, failing which complainant is eligible for 9% interest per annum for the whole amount from the date of order, till realization.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 30th day of January 2017.
Sd/-
Shiny.P.R.
President
Sd/-
Suma.K.P.
Member
Sd/-
V.P.Anantha Narayanan
Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 – Telephone bill for Rs.348/ sent by Opposite party dated 5/10/15
Ext.A2 – Telephone bill for Rs.184/ sent by Opposite party dated 5/12/15
Ext.A3 - Postal receipt.
Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties
Nil
Cost
Rs.1,000/- allowed as cost of the proceedings.
