DATE OF FILING : 3.1.2011
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI
Dated this the 25th day of February, 2011
Present:
SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT
SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER
SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER
C.C No.282/2010
Between
Complainant : The Rural Co-operative Society,
Ltd.No.I.577, Thodupuzha,
Represented by
The Secretary – Bineesh, S/o Ayyappan Pillai,
Palappillil House,
Muthalakkodam P.O.,
Thodupuzha, Idukki District.
(By Advs: K.M.Sanu & Biju R. Naduviledath)
And
Opposite Party : The Manager,
Reliance Communications Ltd.,
Thodupuzha P.O.,
Idukki District.
O R D E R
SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)
The complainant is the Rural Co-operative Society Ltd. No.I.577, which is registered as per the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 represented by its secretary. The complainant availed 20 cell phone connections of the opposite party and availed a wireless phone connection of the opposite party as per the assurance given by the opposite party that they provide prompt service to the complainant. But after that the opposite party never acted as per the assurance given by them and they charged hike amount for the use. So the complainant decided to disconnect the mobile connections of the opposite party and a letter was given to the opposite party stating the same on 1.6.2010 and a receipt was also given by the opposite party for the same. The letter was given after paying the bill upto 31.5.2010. The complainant never used the above cell phone connections of the opposite party after the same. But after receiving the letter from the complainant, the opposite party issued bill for Rs.438/- on 11.6.2010, a bill for Rs.2,464/- on 11.7.2010, a bill for Rs.5,109/- on 11.8.2010, a bill for Rs.8,093/- on 11.9.2010 and a bill for Rs.4,964/- on 11.10.2010. After receiving the letter from the complainant, the opposite party never entitled to issue the bill for the same. So the complainant directly approached the opposite party's office and the matter was informed to the opposite party. But the opposite party told that it was happened only by mistake and also told that not to pay the bill after 1.6.2010. But the complainant was not satisfied with the assurance given by the opposite party, so a lawyer's notice was issued to the opposite party stating that the matter should be informed in writing to the complainant. But no reply was given by the opposite party. Even after receiving the lawyer's notice, the opposite party issued another bill on 5.11.2010 for Rs.853.40/- and it is also stated that legal action will be taken against the complainant. So this petition is filed for cancelling the bill after 1.6.2010 and also for compensation.
2. The opposite party is exparte.
3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to?
4. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts. P1 to P13(series) marked on the side of the complainant.
5. The POINT :-The complainant who is the secretary of the society produced evidence as PW1 and filed affidavit. The complainant availed 20 mobile connections from the opposite party on 7.11.2009 such as 9388255301, 9388255302, 9388255303, 9388255304, 9388255305, 9388255306, 9388255307, 9388255308, 9388255309, 9388255310, 9388255311, 9388255312, 9388255314, 9388255315, 9388255316, 9388255317, 9388255318, 9388255319, 9388255320, 9388255321 and a wireless phone connection as No. 04862 345151. But the opposite party issued bill for hike amount for their service which was against the assurance given by them at the time of availing the connections. So the complainant decided to disconnect the connections of the opposite party and a letter was given to the opposite party for the same. The receipt for the same issued by the opposite party is marked as Ext.P1. Copy of the letter given by the complainant to the opposite party is marked as Ext.P2. A request was given after paying all the bills upto 31.5.2010. Eventhough the letter was given on 1.6.2010, the opposite party issued telephone bills to the complainant on 11.6.2010 in 19 numbers and are marked as Ext.P8(series). Another 19 bills were issued on 11.7.2010 and are marked as Ext.P9(series), 19 bills were issued on 11.8.2010 and are marked as Ext.P10(series), bills issued on 11.9.2010 and those are marked as Ext.P11(series), bills issued on 11.10.2010 and are marked as Ext.P12(series) and the bills issued on 5.11.2010 are marked as Ext.P13(series). So the complainant constrained to issue a lawyer's notice on 29.10.2010 for cancelling the bills issued by the opposite party. The complainant directly enquired about the bills and the opposite party told that it is happened due to mistake from their part. So the complainant constrained to issue a lawyer's notice for cancelling the bills and that was duly received by the opposite party and the AD Card for the same is marked as Ext.P4. Even after receiving the lawyer's notice, the opposite party issued another bill for Rs.853.40 on 5.11.2010. So the complainant constrained to issue another notice to the opposite party on 1.12.2010 for cancelling the bills, but it was not done by the opposite party. The copy of the notice is marked as Ext.P5(a) and the AD Card for the same is marked as Ext.P5(b).
The complainant availed 21 telephone connections from the opposite party including one wireless phone connection and after using the same, the complainant decided to disconnect the connections. A written notice was given on 31.5.2010 after paying the bills upto 31.5.2010 to the opposite party to disconnect the same due to official reasons and Ext.P2 is the copy of the letter given by the complainant for the same. Even after receiving the same, the opposite party again issued bills to the complainant for each telephone number in different rates, but the complainant never used these telephone numbers after 1.6.2010. The bills issued by the opposite party which are Ext.P8(series) to Ext.P13(series) shows the same. So Ext.P8(series) to Ext.P13(series) bills shows that the opposite party demanded a huge amount from the complainant even after the disconnecting letter given by the complainant. As per the complainant, he never used these telephone connections after 1.6.2010. So the complainant issued a lawyer's notice for cancelling the bill which is marked as Ext.P3. Even after receiving the lawyer's notice, the opposite party issued the bill to the complainant dated 5.11.2010. So the complainant again constrained to issue another lawyer's notice on 1.12.2010. Even after receiving the notice, the opposite party never tried to cancel the bill. These matters are not challenged by the opposite party in anywhere. So we think that it is a gross deficiency from the part of the opposite party to issue bills to the complainant even after giving
letter for disconnecting telephone connections, for the period for which the complainant was not using the telephone connections. There is no evidence to show that the complainant caused mental agony because of the issuance of the telephone bills.
Hence the petition allowed. The opposite party is directed to cancel Ext.P8(series) to Ext.P13(series) bills which were issued after 1.6.2010 and also Rs.2,000/- as cost of this petition within one month of receipt of a copy of this order failing which the outstanding amount shall carry 12% interest per annum from the date of default.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 25th day of February, 2011
Sd/-
SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)
Sd/-
SMT. SHEELA JACOB (MEMBER)
Sd/-
SMT. BINDHU SOMAN (MEMBER)
APPENDIX
Deposition :
On the side of the Complainant :
PW1 - Beneesh P.A.
On the side of the Opposite Party :
Nil.
Exhibits :
On the side of the Complainant :
Ext.P1 - Acknowledgement for receipt of Service Termination Request on 1.6.2010.
Ext.P2 - Copy of the letter given by the complainant to the opposite party, dated 31.5.2010.
Ext.P3 - Copy of the lawyer's notice issued by the complainant to the opposite party,
dated 29.10.2010.
Ext.P4 - AD Card for Ext.P3 notice.
Ext.P5(a&b) - Copy of the lawyer's notice issued by the complainant to the opposite party,
dated 1.12.2010 and its AD card.
Ext.P6 - Copy of the registration certificate of the complainant, dated 19.5.2004.
Ext.P7 - Copy of the 5th decision taken in the committee of the complainant on 29.8.2009.
Ext.P8(series) - 19 telephone bills issued by the opposite party on 11.6.2010.
Ext.P9(series) - 19 telephone bills issued by the opposite party on 11.7.2010.
Ext.P10(series) - 19 telephone bills issued by the opposite party on 11.8.2010.
Ext.P11(series) - 19 telephone bills issued by the opposite party on 11.9.2010.
Ext.P12(series) - 19 telephone bills issued by the opposite party on 11.10.2010.
Ext.P13(series) - 19 telephone bills issued by the opposite party on 5.11.2010.
