1. The brief history of the case of the complainant is that she applied for land line connection with Broad Band (BB) facilities before Ops in the month of August, 2014 and as per demand note issued by the Ops, the complainant deposited Rs.1300/- on 30.10.2014 and a landline connection bearing No.06854-232140 was allotted in favour of the complainant. It is submitted that the OPs installed the landline in the month of November, 2014 but did not connect BB for which on 29.12.14 the complainant made a written complaint but the Ops did not listen. It is further submitted that during January, 2015 the OP.2 sent bill for Rs.2145.54 for the bill period 01.12.14 to 31.12.14 without providing any service but on protest the OP.1 suggested to deposit the said amount to be adjusted in the next bill. The complainant deposited the said amount but the Ops sent other two bills dt.06.01.15 for the above period and on protest the Ops advised to deposit the said amount but the complainant did not pay. It is also further submitted that the Ops disconnected the outgoing calls on 12.2.15 and installed the Modem on 13.02.15 for the BB and also again issued two bills for Rs.479.21 and Rs.464/- both dated 06.04.15 without providing any service. Thus alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Ops she has filed this case praying the Forum to direct the Ops to install the landline connection with BB services and to refund Rs.2150/- and to pay Rs.90, 000/- towards compensation and costs to the complainant.
2. The Ops filed counter in joint denying the allegations of the complainant and contended that the complainant has deposited Rs.1300/- on 30.10.14 as per demand note towards Security Deposit and the telephone and BB was activated on 08.11.14 and 30.11.14 respectively. The complainant used 29 units for the land line but did not use BB and hence the 1st bill for the aforesaid connection was issued for Rs.2150/- and the complainant deposited the same on 05.01.15. The 2nd bill for the period 01.12.14 to 31.12.14 for Rs.1087/- was also issued. The Ops contended that the BB services could not be provided due to fault in cable for which rebate of Rs.3016/- was allowed and the Ops denied regarding receipt of any complaint on 29.12.14. The Ops also contended that out going facility of the telephone was disconnected on 15.2.15 for nonpayment of arrears bills whereas the BB was installed on 13.2.15 but modem could not be installed earlier due to technical problems and cable fault. Thus denying all other allegations of the complainant and denying any fault on their part, the Ops prayed to dismiss the case of the complainant.
3. Both the parties have filed certain documents along with affidavits in support of their cases. Heard from the parties through their respective A/Rs and perused the materials available on record.
4. In this case the complainant applied for landline connection along with BB facilities and deposited Rs.1300/- (S.D. Rs.500/- + Plan deposit of Rs.800/-) with the Ops on 30.10.2014 as per demand note issued by the Ops. Admittedly the landline was installed in the house of the complainant on 08.11.14. The case of the complainant is that the Ops connected the landline without BB services for which she made complaint on 29.12.14 whereas the Ops stated that they activated the BB on 30.11.14 from their office.
5. It is seen from the record that the complainant has applied for Combo-899 Plan which includes SD amount of Rs.500/- and Plan Deposit of Rs.800/-. As the complainant has not opted for modem or modem was not available with Ops, the cost of modem was not added to the said initial deposit of Rs.1300/-. The Ops at the time of hearing submitted that the BB connection was given on 30.11.14 and the fact was intimated to the complainant over phone. They further submitted that it was the duty of the complainant to install modem and avail the BB services.
6. It is further seen that the Ops issued 1st bill dt.06.12.14 for an amount of Rs.2146/- which includes Clip charges, installation charges and BB installation charges the details of which are available in the bill dt.06.12.14. The complainant has used the landline for 29 units during the said period and deposited the bill amount on 05.01.15.
7. It is the further case of the complainant that the Ops continued to charge their dues in every month without giving any service as the modem for the BB was installed on 13.2.15. The Ops submitted that as per request of the complainant they configured the modem on 13.2.15 although the BB connection was given on 30.11.14.
8. From the above facts it was ascertained that on 30.11.14 the BB services was extended to the landline of th complainant but the complainant was not using the facility by connecting modem which is not the fault of the Ops. The Ops continued to demand monthly charges as per plan rate in their subsequent bills but it was found that the complainant has not paid the said bills. Further due to nonpayment of bills the Ops have disconnected the outgoing facilities of the complainant on 15.2.15. It is seen from the bill dt.06.3.15 that the amount payable to the Ops was Rs.3109/- and in the bill dt.06.04.15 the Ops have adjusted Rs.3017/- towards non availing of BB facility for the bill period 06.12.14 to 06.3.15.
9. From the above facts and circumstances, it was ascertained that the Ops have extended BB services to the complainant on 30.11.14 and the complainant has not used the said facility till the end of March, 2015 when the facilities were totally disconnected. The Ops have also adjusted the amounts on BB minimum hiring period. It was also ascertained that due to nonpayment of bills the Ops have disconnected the facilities which is not the fault of the Ops as it is an automatic mechanism. After giving careful thought to the rival contentions raised before us, we are of the opinion that there is no merit in the allegations of the complainant as the Ops have committed no deficiency in service.
10. In the result, we dismiss the case of the complainant which bears no merit but without costs in the peculiar circumstances of the case.
(to dict.)
