<br /> 2. Opposite parties set exparte. Version filed by the opposite parties but without setting aside exparte order. Hence the version filed by the opposite parties cannot be considered. <br /> <br /> 3. The points that would arise for consideration are :<br /> (i)Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties ?<br /> (ii)Whether the complainant is entitled to get Rs. 6,600/- from opposite parties?<br /> (iii)Whether the opposite parties have to return the unencashed cheques to complainant?<br /> (iv)Reliefs and costs?<br /> <br /> 4. On the part of the complainant, PW1 filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination and Exts. P1 to P5 are marked.<br /> <br /> 5. Points (i) to (iv) :- The case of the complainant is that attracted by the various advertisements and schemes of the opposite parties complainant decided to get a Reliance mobile phone connection through a scheme called 'Dhirubhai Ambani Pioneer Offer'. M/s Academic Book House, Thiruvananthapuram is a franchise unit of opposite parties. In Februrary 2003 complainant approached the said Franchise unit of opposite parties and gave post dated cheques for a sum of Rs. 21000/- (11 cheques – one for Rs. 3000/- and 10 for Rs. 1800/-) and executed necessary documents and loan agreement (Form No. 1065666965). As there was no mobile phone in stock, complainant was informed that he would be supplied with a mobile phone a later date. Thereafter, for long time as there was no communication from opposite parties, complainant approached M/s Academic Book House in March 2003. Then the complainant was informed that the Franchise had been closed but the cheques had been forwarded to the opposite parties. The said M/s Academic Book House is not a party in the complaint. What is necessarily to be looked into is whether the said cheques given by the complainant have been forwarded by the Franchise to opposite parties and whether the said cheques have been encashed by opposite parties. It is stated in the complaint that the said cheques have been drawn at IDBI Bank Ltd., Thiruvananthapuram. Ext. P1 is the customer account ledger report from 01.01.2003 to 31.03.2003 issued by the IDBI Bank Ltd, Thiruvananthapuram to the complainant. It is evident from Ext. P1 that on 24.02.2003, the opposite parties encashed one cheque for Rs. 3000/- and included the same in transaction debit amount. Ext. P2 is the saving statement for the period from 01.04.2003 to 30.06.2003, issued by the IDBI Bank to the complainant. As per Ext. P2, on 31.05.2003, opposite parties encashed a cheque bearing No. 10693 for Rs. 1800/-. Ext. P3 is the statement for the period from 01.07.2003 31.08.2003 issued by the IDBI Bank Ltd. To the complainant. As per Ext. P3 opposite party encashed a cheque bearing No. 10682 for Rs. 1800/-. From Exts. P1 to P3, it is evident that opposite parties altogether encashed three cheques for Rs. 6600/- given by the complainant. The learned counsel appearing for the complainant submitted that still 8 cheques of the complainant are with the opposite parties. Though M/s Academic Book House, a franchise of opposite parties, is not a party in the complaint it can be inferred from Exts. P1 to P3 that the cheques given by the complainant to the franchise had reached the opposite parties, otherwise opposite parties could not encash the aforesaid three cheques of the complainant. The first point requiring consideration is whether there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. The learned counsel appearing for complainant submitted that for getting mobile phone connection, complainant executed necessary documents and loan agreement and gave 11 cheques for a sum of Rs. 21000/- in Februrary 2003. Ext. P4 is a letter dated 10.12.2003 issued by the 3rd opposite party with envelope showing return address. In Ext. P4 the reference is the loan agreement form No. 1065666965, which has been mentioned by the complainant in the complaint. The subject is regarding the dishonour of cheque No. 10683 issued by the complainant towards EQI payment. PW1 deposed that the dishonoured cheque is the 4th cheque. Three cheques have already been encashed by opposite parties. Though the opposite parties have not supplied the mobile phone, they have encashed three cheques. Ext. P5 is a copy of notice stating the hitherto incidents issued by the complainant to the opposite parties with postal receipts and acknowledgement cards. Opposite parties received the said letter. Even after the written request, opposite parties never acted positively. PW1 deposed that till date there has been no response to his notice (Ext. P5) nor cheques returned nor the aforesaid phone connection given to him. All these amount to deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Deficiency in service proved. Other points requiring consideration are connected with the first point. From Exts. P1 to P5 and affidavit in lieu of chief examination it is crystal clear that opposite parties illegally encashed 3 cheques amounting to Rs. 6600/- and the remaining unencashed cheques are still with opposite parties. Hence we find complainant is entitled to get Rs. 6600/- illegally encashed by the opposite parties. Opposite parties are bound to return the remaining unencashed cheques drawn at IDBI Bank, Thiruvananthapuram since opposite party failed to give mobile connection to the complainant. We also find opposite parties liable for deficiency in service and reliefs. <br /> <br /> 6. In the result, complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to repay the complainant a sum of Rs. 6600/-. The opposite party is also directed to return the complainant the remaining unencashed cheques drawn at the IDBI Bank, Thiruvananthapuram. Opposite party is also directed to pay Rs. 1500/- to the complainant towards compensation and cost. The opposite parties are hereby directed to comply this order within two months from the date of this order. <br /> <br /> A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.<br /> <br /> Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the day of 29th March, 2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> G. SIVAPRASAD,<br /> President.<br /> <br /> BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> S.K. SREELA : MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> O.P.No. 360/2004<br /> APPENDIX<br /> I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS : <br /> NIL<br /> II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :<br /> <br /> P1 - Statement issued by the IDBI Bank,Tvpm. Dated 19.12.2003 for the period between 01.01.2003 and 31.03.2003. <br /> P2 - Statement issued by the IDBI Bank,Tvpm. With customer ID – 1084246 for the period between 01.04.2003 and 30.06.2003.<br /> P3 - Statement issued by the IDBI Bank,Tvpm or the period between 01.07.2003 and 29.08.2003.<br /> P4 - Letter dated 10.12.2003 by the 3rd opposite party with envelope showing return address.<br /> P5 - Copy of notice issued by the complainant with postal receipt dated 09.01.2004 and acknowledgement card. <br /> <br /> III OPPOSITE PARTIES' WITNESS :<br /> NIL<br /> IV OPPOSITE PARTIES' DOCUMENTS :<br /> <br /> NIL<br /> PRESIDENT<br /> <br />