By Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:

The complaint filed against the Opposite Party to rectify the defects in the cable connection and to reinstate the cable connection already detached.

2. The complaint in brief is as follows:- The Complainant had been a regular subscriber of cable net work since 2003 onwards. The subscription charges were monthly paid and cable connection was also comparatively better till September 2010. The Complainant had been paying subscription charge Rs.100/-. The signals supplied by the Opposite Party were not sufficient and appropriate that disrupted the visibility of the television. The pictures in all channels were not cleared and some of the channels were not provided by the Opposite Parties.  Up to February 2011 the Opposite Parties collected from the Complainant the subscription charge. The disconnection of the cable and improper supply of cable signals are deficiency in service . There may be an order directing the Opposite Parties to reconnect the cable connection of the Complainant and to rectify the defects of the cable connection so as to get the clear pictures. Towards compensation Rs.5,000/- is also to be given to the Complainant. In case of any failure on the part of the Opposite Party to supply the cable connection clear and uninterrupted the advance amount Rs.1,000/- to be refunded along with compensation of Rs.5,000/-.

3. The Opposite Parties filed version in short it is as follows:- The 2^nd Opposite Party is only a collection agent of the cable net work and the 3^rd Opposite Party is the licency. 65 subscribers are provided the cable connection and the pictures are clearly visible. The cable supply are proper and timely maintained. The claim of the Complainant that he used to pay Rs.100/- as subscription charge is false. The subscription charge collected from Opposite Party is Rs.140/-. The Complainant did not remit subscription charge in time and the amount became due. The disconnection of the cable was due to the non payment of the subscription charge. The Opposite Parties are ready to reconnect the disconnected cable if the dues are cleared. The Complainant is not entitled to get cost and compensation and it is to be dismissed with cost.

4. Points that are to be settled are:-

1. Is there any deficiency in service in the supply of cable signals?

2. Relief and cost.

5. Points No. 1 and 2:- The evidence in this case consists of the proof affidavit of the Complainant, Exts.A1 to A5 and the oral testimony of the Complainant. The Opposite Parties did not tender any evidence to substantiate their contention.

6. The dispute in issue is in respect of the bad signals supplied by the Opposite Parties. The Complainant has not produced any documents to establish his contention that Rs.1,000/- is the advance amount given to the Opposite Party by the Complainant. Any how it is to be implied that the cable connection pertained by the Complainant would have been on advance amount. Ext.A4 is the receipt produced that includes the due amount Rs.280/- as the sum liable to be paid by the Complainant. The Complainant had to clear the dues of Rs.280/- till April 2011. The other contention of the Complainant is that after September 2010 the signals were not proper the pictures were interrupted by bad signals. Ext.A1 is the lawyer notice of the Complainant to the Opposite Party. It is admitted in that the monthly subscription charge paid by the Complainant is Rs.140/-. The Opposite Parties have not tendered any evidence to establish their contention. The claim of the Complainant that the due amount was only due to non supply of signals. The Complainant is not liable to pay the subscription charge if the signals are not provided by the Opposite Parties. The disconnection of the cable signals was admittedly on May 2011. The Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 are directed to reconnect the cable connection on acceptance of Rs.140/- the amount towards due.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 are directed to reconnect the cable connection to the Complainant on receiving Rs.140/- (Rupees One hundred and Forty only) the amount towards due of the subscription charge. The supply of signals to the Complainant are to be having clarity. The Complainant is also entitled to get the cost of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five hundred only). This is to be complied by the Opposite parties No.1 and 2 within month from date of receipt of this order.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 30^th November 2011.

Date of filing:06.07.2011.

PRESIDENT: Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

/True Copy/

Sd/-

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

A P P E N X I X

Witness for the Complainant:

PW1. Raveendran Vaidhyar Complainant.

Witness for the Opposite Parties:

Nil.

Exhibits for the Complainant:

A1. Copy of Lawyer Notice. dt:10.05.2011.

A2. Reply Notice. dt:31.05.2011.

A3 series. Postal Receipt and Acknowledgement.

A4. Demand and Disconnection Notice.

A5. Demand and Disconnection Notice.

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:-

Nil.