Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

206/2014

Basrin Furuha, W/o.A.Mohammed Riswan, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Reliance Communication, Rep by the Manager, - Opp.Party(s)

S.Mohammed Ansar

15 Feb 2017

ORDER

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  29.10.2014

                                                                Order pronounced on:  15.02.2017

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,           MEMBER II

 

WEDNESDAY THE 15^th   DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017

 

C.C.NO.206/2014

 

 

Basrin Faruha (F.33,)

W/o.A.Mohamed Riswan,

New No.11, Old No.19, 3^rd Floor,

Fathima Manzil, Ramaiah Street,

Shenoy Nagar,

Chennai – 600 030.

                                                                                    ….. Complainant

 

..Vs..

The Reliance Communication,

Represented by the Manager,

No.6 Haddows Road,

Nungambakkam,

Chennai – 600 034.

.....Opposite Party

Date of complaint                                 : 30.10.2014

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.S.Mohamed Ansar, P.Palanikumar,

                                                                 R.Abdur Rahman, N.Mohamed Rabi

         

Counsel for    Opposite Party                   : M/s.Shivakumar and Suresh

 

 

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant to direct the Opposite Party to refund the entire money paid by him and to pay a sum of Rs.99,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of the Complaint  u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant had subscribed Reliance landline broadband connection on 22.07.2014, in A/C No.100000144309775 and his user ID No.349021191491. The Opposite Party assured to give 1024kbps port speed in plan name wcc 1649T. Therefore the Complainant has paid advance rental and deposited amount for a sum of Rs.1450/- on 19.07.2014 and the Complainant got internet connection on 22.07.2014.  From the date of connection the Complainant has not received full port speed 1024kbps, assured by the Opposite Party and the internet connection was very slow. Some times when the Complainant was working in internet, the connection was automatically disconnected because of low speed. Therefore the Complainant much suffered. That on 11.08.2014 the Complainant has not got internet connection. The Complainant contacted Opposite Party customer care and followed their instruction and even then, he did not get internet connection and thereafter a Complaint No.223665117 registered and assured to solve in 24 hours. On 13.08.2014, the Complainant contacted the customer care, he was informed that his request solved. When the Complainant contacted they said that his problem will be rectified by tomorrow. On 15.08.2014 when he contacted through phone, the customer care informed that his problem was solved. However, the same was not solved. The Complainant narrating all the fact and issued notice dated 26.08.2014 to the Opposite Party to rectify in 72 hours without fail. No action was taken by Opposite Party. The Complainant is a teacher; she is reaching to the students through website, she also taking online classes to the student. Therefore the internet connection is must to render her service, but now it created problems to her. Therefore the Complainant suffered their livelihood. But the Opposite Party issued bills for payment without internet connection and without service. Failure to render service and issuing bill is without internet connection is deficiency on the part of Opposite Party. Hence the Complainant filed this Complaint to refund the money deposited by him and also compensation for mental agony with costs of the Complaint.

2. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE  OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

           The Opposite Party submits that for any loss, if at all incurred by the Complainant, this Opposite Party is neither liable nor responsible. The compensation claimed by the Complainant is whimsical and not substantiated. In any event, as per the terms and conditions agreed upon, the Opposite Party is not at all liable to pay any compensation/damages in any event. The Opposite Party admits that the Complainant had subscribed Reliance Landline Broad Band Connection and it is also true that the Opposite Party had assured to give up to 1024 kbps port speed in plan name WCC 1649T. The Opposite Party has not at all collected any advance rental and deposit amount as alleged by the Complainant. The Complainant had paid a sum of Rs.800/- towards installation charges and a sum of Rs.469/- towards rental charges and not paid Rs.1450/- as alleged by the Complainant. At the time of peak hours all the customers may use the connection at the same time and therefore at that time he may not get the full speed which is not within the control of the Opposite Party and rest of the time he may get the full port speed upto 1024 kbps as assured by the Opposite Party. After receiving the Complaint, inspected his premises and came to know that he is not able to get the internet connection due to the server problem. In fact the entire building did not get the internet connection due to the entire power point was switch off by their staff and hence not only the Complainant, others in the building had internet connection problem. After that the Opposite Party informed to every occupant not to switch off the power point in order to avoid the server problem. It is further submitted that as of now all the customer in that premises including the Complainant had got prompt internet connection and the grievance of even the Complainant was redressed by the Opposite Party. The grievance of the Complainant was redressed by the Opposite Party and he had used the connection for the month of July and August 2014 and hence the bill was on 11.08.2014 for Rs.647/- which was not paid by the Complainant purposely. It is further submitted that  due date for the said bill on 01.09.2014, since the Complainant was not making payment, the connection was suspended on 04.09.2014. As a goodwill gesture, the Opposite Party waived all his bills and restored the connection once again in the month of October, 2014 and therefore the Opposite Party had not created mental agony to the Complainant as alleged by her. The Complainant has made no case or ground for any reliefs in her favour. The Complaint is devoid of merits and the same deserves to be dismissed with costs.

3. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

 

 

4. POINT NO :1 

           It is an admitted fact that the Complainant availed landline broad band connection on 22.07.2014, in A/C No.10000014409775 and the Opposite Party assured to 1024 kbps port speed in plan name WCC1649T and the Complainant had also paid an amount of Rs.1450/- on 19.07.2014 as per Ex.A1, he got internet connection on 22.07.2014.

          5. According to the Complainant, the Opposite Party committed the following deficiencies are that

          1.the internet connection was very slow,

          2. when she was working in the internet connection was automatically   

              disconnected because of low speed.

          3.on 11.08.2014 as he did not get internet connection, complained over phone to the Opposite Party customer care, though they replied that it is rectified, the same was not rectified and again she contacted on 13.08.2014, the customer care replied that the problem was solved without rectifying the same and again complained on 15.08.2014, she got the same reply, hence he sent Ex.A2 notice dated 26.08.2014 to rectify in 72 hours failing which action will be initiated and further the Complainant is a teacher and teaching through website and taking online classes and she suffered.

          6. The Opposite Party contended in the written version that during  peak hours she may not get full speed and after receiving Complaint inspected her premises and she is not able to get connection due to server  problem and in fact entire building did not get internet connection due to the entire power point was switched off by their staff and after that the Opposite Party informed even occupants not to switch off the  power point in order to avoid server problem and there by the grievance of the Complainant redressed and the bill on 11.08.2014 issued for Rs.647/- for the use of July & August  2014 and the Complainant did not make payment, the connection was suffered on 04.09.2014 and as a good will gesture, the Opposite Party waived all her bills and once again October, 2014 connection was given and therefore the Opposite Party has not committed any deficiency in service.

          7. The amount of Rs.1450/- paid by the Complainant was adjusted in Ex.A1 bill, after adjusting the due amount of Rs.647/- payable by the Complainant to the Opposite Party with regard to connection was very slow and disconnected automatically was due to ‘the online power point was switch off’ and the same was informed by Opposite Party to all the occupants of the building not to switch off and the same was pleaded in the written version. This fact was not denied by the Complainant in her proof affidavit which was filed subsequent to filing of written version of the Opposite Party. Further, the connection was suspended on 04.09.2014 and waived all the bills and once again connection was given in the month of October 2014 was also not denied by the Complainant. When the Opposite Party’s case was not denied by the Complainant in her evidence, the Opposite Party case has to be accepted. While accepting the Opposite Party case, it is held that the Complainant suppressed the entire facts of the case. Since the sudden disconnection of internet to the Complainant is due to power point was switched off, it is held that the Complainant has not proved  her case and we hold that the Opposite Party has not committed by deficiency in service.

 

 

08. POINT NO:2

Since the Opposite Party has not committed any Deficiency in Service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

          In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.     

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 15^th day of February 2017.

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 11.08.2014                   Bill Copy

Ex.A2 dated 26.08.2014                   Notice

Ex.A3 dated 27.08.2014                   Service Report

Ex.A4 dated 27.08.2014                   Postal Receipt

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTY :

 

Ex.B1 dated NIL                     Statement of Account of the Complainant

 

 

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT