Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/16/2015

Ms. Pallavi Mathur - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Matrix Cellular(International) Services - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Naresh Kumar Bansal Adv.

27 Aug 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	16 of 2015
Date  of  Institution	:	09.01.2015
Date   of   Decision	:	27.08.2015

 

 

 

 

 

Ms.Pallavi Mathur daughter of Dr.S.K.Mathur, resident of H.No.1512, Sector 43-B, Chandigarh.

 

             …..Complainant

Versus

 

The Matrix Cellular (International) Services Private Limited, SCO No.188-189, First Floor, Sector 8-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh 160009

 

 ….. Opposite Party

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         SH.JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU       MEMBER

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

 

 

For complainant(s)      :     Sh.Naresh Kumar Bansal, Counsel for                   complainant.

 

For Opposite Party(s)   :     Sh.Vikas Kumar Gupta, Counsel for   Opposite    Party

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

 

          As per the case of the complainant, the complainant purchased one SIM from Opposite Party-Matrix Cellular from Chandigarh to go to Austria and it was purchased for calling purposes only.  It is averred that the Opposite Party had blocked the Credit Card of Standard Chartered Bank of the complainant as security for the payment of usage of the SIM card during her visit to abroad.  It is also averred that that the SIM, which was delivered on 12.9.2014 was valid from 13.9.2014 to 16.10.2014, but still the facility on  the SIM for which the complainant had availed the services of the Opposite Party did not function. It is pleaded that during her visit to abroad on arrival at Dubai suddenly the company started to show data usage, which was never asked for by the complainant nor the company gave any information about the automatic starting of data facility on the SIM given to the complainant.  It is also pleaded that the Opposite Party Company raised very high bill against the data usage vide bill Ann.C-3. However, the complainant sent a legal notice dated 13.10.2014 to the Opposite Party with request to withdraw the data usage charges from the bill being illegal, so she could pay the correct bill amount to the company, but of no use and the Opposite Party Company withdrew the amount from the credit card attached before issuing the SIM to the complainant. It is asserted that due to the defective and deficiency services of the OP, the complainant could not use the facility availed from the Opposite Party in abroad and had to spent huge amount on availing the alternative services.  It is also asserted that the Opposite Party issued illegal bill for the usage & facility, which was never demanded.  Hence, this complaint has been filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party.

 

2]       The Opposite Party has filed reply and admitted the issuance of SIM Card to the complainant as well as deduction of bill amount from her credit card attached while providing the said facility to the complainant. It is pleaded that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party as the services had been resumed immediately upon the receipt of request for the same.  It is submitted that the complainant had signed the Customer Agreements Forms and Tariff Plan after duly reading and understanding the terms & conditions of the same, wherein it is clearly mentioned that Data/GPRS services shall be pre activated on all SIM.  It is also submitted that the bills so raised were as per the usage of the complainant and ledger account maintained by the Opposite Party.  It is further submitted that the Data Services were in fact availed by the complainant. Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, the Opposite Party has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

        

3]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions

 

4]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.  

 

5]       Admittedly, the complainant purchased one SIM from Opposite Party i.e. Matrix Cellular, from Chandigarh to go to Austria.  The SIM was purchased for calling purposes only and the Opposite Party had also blocked the Credit Card of Standard Chartered Bank of the complainant as security for the payment of usage of the card during her visit to abroad.  Further submitted that the SIM, which was delivered on 12.9.2014, was valid from 13.9.2014 to 16.10.2014. It is submitted on behalf of the complainant that all such services availed by the complainant from the Opposite Party did not function well.  Originally the complainant vide present complaint despite alleging non-functioning, also assailed that during her visit to abroad on arrival at Dubai suddenly the company started to show data usage, which was never asked for by the complainant nor the company gave any information about the automatic starting of data facility on the SIM given to the complainant.  Resultantly, the Opposite Party Company raised very high bill against the data usage vide bill Ann.C-3.  Being unjustified, the legal notice dated 13.10.2014 was sent to the Opposite Party with request to withdraw the data usage charges from the bill, so the complainant can pay the correct bill to the company, but of no use and the Opposite Party Company withdrew the amount from the credit card attached before issuing the SIM to the complainant.

 

6]       It is pertinent to mention here that during the course of arguments, the ld.Counsel for the complainant made a statement, recorded separately, dated 17.8.2015 to the following effect:-

“I do not press the claim for refund of excessive bill but I press the claim for deficiency in services and litigation charges.”

 

7]       Accordingly, the direction was given to the Reader of the Forum to make necessary correction in the prayer clause, which accordingly was done and now the only matter left to be decided is with regard to the compensation for alleged deficiency in service on the part of the OP alongwith litigation charges claimed by the complainant.

 

8]       The counsel for the complainant submitted that due to the defective and deficient services of the OP, the complainant could not use the facility availed from the Opposite Party in abroad and had to spent huge amount on availing the alternative services. Further submitted that since Opposite Party Company had some problem in Austria, the complainant was not able to make any call, which was informed by the complainant to the Opposite Party by e-mail dated 15.9.2014 and in response received e-mail accepting the failure of network in Austria. The Opposite Party issued illegal and without use usage bill, which was never demanded, which are totally inefficient, defective and causing physical and mental harassment to the complainant. 

 

9]       Annexure C-2 is evident of the fact that the allegations in regard to the deficiency in service, with regard to the non-function of the SIM Card on 15.9.2014, are correct as vide e-mail dated 15.9.2014, the OP Company apologized for the non-functioning of the Matrix number issued to the complainant.  The said contentions of the e-mail is reproduced as below:-

“Please consider our sincere apologies for the inconvenience caused to you due to non functionality of the Matrix number issued to you.  We would like to apprise you that we are currently facing outage in Austria.  Our network engineers are working hard to get is fixed.  The service will be up any time soon.”

 

 

10]      This apology on the part of the OP is sufficient to hold that the complainant could not use the facility, as per the assurance given under the agreement.  The OP in their reply claimed that there is no deficiency in service on their part as the services had been resumed immediately upon the receipt of request for the same and claimed that the complainant had signed the Customer Agreement Form and tariff plan after duly reading and understanding the terms & conditions of the same.

 

11]      There is no proof on record to show that the services were immediately restored on the number of the complainant availed from the OPs, but it is apparent on record that the same were not available to the complainant on the date 15.9.2010 while her visit to abroad, which certainly has caused harassment mentally and financially to the complainant as, she could not use the said facility.  The services were availed from the Opposite Party certainly for the hassle-free communication in case of need and also being on the foreign land the uninterrupted services were supposed to be given by the Opposite Party, which they failed to provide at the outset of its usage on 15.9.2010.  

 

12]      In view of the above findings, the compliant stands allowed. The Opposite Party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.5000/- to the complainant towards compensation and as well Rs.3000/- as litigation expenses.

         This order shall be complied with by the Opposite Party within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of its copy, failing which it shall be liable to pay interest @18% per annum on the compensation amount of Rs.5000/- from the date of filing this complaint till it is paid, apart from paying the litigation expenses of Rs.3000/-. 

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

27^th August, 2015                   

                                                                             Sd/-  

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

(JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU)

MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

Om                                                                                                                       

 

 

DISTRICT FORUM – II

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.16 OF 2015

PRESENT:   None   Dated the 27th day of August, 2015

O R D E R                        Vide our detailed order of even date, recorded separately, the complaint has been allowed against Opposite Party.                    After compliance, file be consigned to record room.

 

(Priti Malhotra)	(Rajan Dewan)	(Jaswinder Singh Sidhu)
Member	President	Member