BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE URBAN

24^th DAY OF OCTOBER 2016

O R D E R

SMT. SHANTHA P.K, MEMBER

The complainant has filed this complaint U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opposite Party (herein after referred as OP) with a prayer to direct the OP to refund the amount of Rs.1,995/- and compensation of Rs.3,000/-.  Also direct the OP to pay Rs.1,000/- towards the cost of this proceedings.

2. The brief averments made in the complaint are as under:

The complainant bought Tikona Broadband connection on 2^nd November 2015 by paying amount of Rs.1,995/- through his credit card.  Since the day the connection was installed it didn’t work and connection used to drop at regular intervals.  The complainant registered 10-15 complaints but no technician visited.  At last on 5^th December one of the technician visited the complainant place and said he cannot solve the problem because it was due to network issue.  After this the complainant has given complaint 3 to 4 times but OP did not respond.  When OP was unable to provide the service the complainant disconnected the connection and asked for refund of the amount.  The complainant sent e-mail docket No.1-3768266856 to appellate Authority Tikona i.e., OP on 16^th November 2015 but issue was not resolved.  The complainant sent another e-mail on 04^th January 2016 but no action was taken and the connection stopped working.  Again the complainant lodged a complaint through e-mail on 12^th February 2016.  OP replied that they will refund Rs.506-91 by way of cheque within 30 working days at the complainants’ registered address.  But cheque is not yet received.  The complainant used the connection for 2-3 hours in between those days.  So he is asking for full money from OP.  Hence he approached the Forum seeking relief and filed complaint against OP.

3. After service of notice, OP failed to appear before the Forum and was placed ex-parte.

4. Perused averments made in the complaint, affidavit filed in lieu of evidence, documents filed by the complainant and other materials placed on record. 

5. Here in this case, the complainant applied for Tikona Digital Networks Pvt. Ltd., Broadband service and installation was done on 02^nd November 2015.  The complainant paid Rs.1,995/-.  The complainant produced the invoice of OP as document No.1.

6. Since the day the connection was installed it did not work and connection used to drop at regular intervals.  The complainant registerd 10-15 complaints through e-mail and requested OP to send technician and restore the services.  The OP assured the complainant that issue will be resolved.  The complainant has produced the e-mail correspondences between himself and OP.

7. When the issue was not resolved the complainant decided to lodge a complaint through e-mail on 16^th November 2015 requesting to send the technician or cancel the connection.  On December 05^th the OP sent a technician but he said the problem was due to network issue and he cannot resolve the problem.  After this the complainant has given 3-4 complaints but there was no response from OP, therefore he lost patience and disconnected the connection and asked for full money refund as the OP was unable to provide the service.  The complainant also requested the Appellate Authority on 16^th November and 04^th January and also on 12^th February 2016.  Finally they responded that they will refund Rs.506-91 by way of cheque within 30 working days at the complainants’ registered address.  But cheque is not yet received. 

8. OP without providing any service is demanding the complainant to pay the bill.  This shows gross negligence and amounts to deficiency of service on their part and made the complainant to approach the Forum. 

9. The above said assertions of the complaint have remained unchallenged.  OP neither filed version nor denied the sworn testimony of the complainant.  Under the circumstances, we have no reasons to disbelieve the sworn testimony of the complainant.

10. The very fact of OP not contesting the proceedings leads us to draw an inference that OP is admitting the claim of the complainant.  There is no reason to disbelieve the unchallenged affidavit of the complainant and the documents produced.  The complainant suffered inconvenience and mental agony due to the negligent conduct of OP.  In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant has successfully proved the deficiency of service on the part of OP. 

  11. Hence, we proceed to pass the following:             

       O R D E R

The complaint filed U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the complainant is allowed in part.  OP is directed to pay Rs.1,995/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, in default to pay interest at 9% p.a from the date of order till realization.  Further OP is directed to pay compensation of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant for causing hardship, inconvenience and mental agony together with litigation cost of Rs.3,000/-.

Furnish free copy of this order to both the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Forum on this 24^th day of October 2016)

MEMBER                            MEMBER                     PRESIDENT

Vln*

COMPLAINT No.696/2016

Complainant                 -        Sri. Jyothula Srinivas,

Bangalore-76.

                       -vs-

Opposite Party              -        J.Srinivas,

Manager,

Tikona Digital Networks Pvt. Ltd.,
Bangalore-560071.

Witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant dated 15.09.2016.

1. Sri. Jyothula Srinivas,

                 OP    -       Absent

MEMBER                            MEMBER                     PRESIDENT

Vln*