BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
PRESENT
SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT
SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER
SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER
C.C. No. 346/2010 Filed on 2.9.10.2010
Dated : 31.10.2011
Complainant :
Shahim. B, S/o Basheer, Kannyaruvila Veedu, Edavilakom, Murukkumpuzha P.O, Veiloor Village, Thiruvananthapuram Taluk.
(By adv. A. Sabeer)
Opposite party :
The Zonal Manager, Idea Cellular Ltd., Kallampally, Sreekaryam, Thiruvananthapuram.
This O.P having been heard on 21.10.2011, the Forum on 31.10.2011 delivered the following :
ORDER
SMT. S.K. SREELA, MEMBER
The case of the complainant is as follows: Complainant is a practising lawyer and the aggrieved party in the above complaint. Two years back the complainant had taken a pre-paid Idea Cellular mobile connection from the opposite party's company and the mobile number was 9656856329. As a practising lawyer the complainant has so many contacts with clients as well as officers through the said mobile connection. Almost all contacts were saved in the SIM card. While so on 15.10.2010 at about 4.30 pm when the complainant was trying to call his friend Mr. Sabu to his mobile phone number 9846078309, the call became disconnected and collapsed the SIM card without any reason. Subsequently the mobile phone became in off line mode. Thereafter the complainant tried to insert the SIM card into another phone. That was also not succeeded. Due to the SIM card registration failure all the contacts in the SIM card were lost and thereby caused huge loss to the complainant's profession. After the failure of the SIM function, on the very same day itself the complainant contacted the Head Office of the opposite party through their out let at Mangalapuram. But they have made a reply that the SIM card cannot be regenerated and the contacts cannot be revived. But they have offered to issue a duplicate SIM card to the complainant on a condition that the complainant had to furnish the numbers of the last five call made through the said connection and to pay Rs. 110/-. The complainant told them about the impracticable situation to furnish the five numbers as all the contacts were lost due to the SIM card failure. But the officials did not take any steps to redress the grievances of the complainant. That the SIM card failed due to the deficiency of service of the opposite party's company. All the unfortunate occurrence happened due to the sole deficiency of service on the part of opposite party's company and the same has to be compensated by the company. Hence he prays for reconnection of the service and for a direction to regenerate all the contacts in the SIM card and for compensation and costs.
Opposite party has filed their detailed version and the learned counsel for the opposite party urged before us that in view of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in General Manager, Telecom Vs. Krishnan & another reported in III (2009) CPJ 71 (SC), the Consumer Forum cannot have jurisdiction and in this view the complaint deserves to be dismissed.
Hence the question of maintainability was heard as a preliminary issue.
As seen from the averments in the complaint, the dispute appears to be regarding reconnection of service and for regeneration of all the contacts in the SIM card. The Hon'ble Supreme Court as per Sec. 7 B has held that “In our opinion when there is a special remedy provided in Sec. 7 B of the Indian Telegraph Act regarding disputes in respect of telephone bills, then the remedy under the Consumer Protection Act is by implication barred. Sec. 7 B of the Telegraph Act reads as under :
Sec. 7 B. Arbitration of Disputes : (1) Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, if any dispute concerning any telegraph line, appliance or apparatus arises between the telegraph authority and the person or whose benefit the line, appliance or apparatus is, or has been provided, the dispute shall be determined by arbitration and shall, for the purpose of such determination, be referred to an Arbitrator appointed by the Central Government either specifically for the determination of that dispute or generally for the determination of disputes under this section. (2) The award of the Arbitrator appointed under Sub-section (1) shall be conclusive between the parties to the dispute and shall not be questioned in any Court. Rule 413 of the “Telegraph Rules provides that all services relating to telephone are subject to Telegraph Rules. A telephone connection can be disconnected by the Telegraph Authority for default of payment under Rule 443 of the Rules”. In the case in hand complainant has alleged that while using the mobile phone number 9846078309 the call got disconnected and the mobile phone became in off line mode and his effort to insert the SIM card to another phone also failed and he could not contact any of his clients whose numbers were feeded in the same SIM card and he has prayed for a direction for reconnection of the service and regeneration of all the contacts in the SIM card which brings the case within the ambit of the above rulings. Thus it can be seen that the dispute is regarding regeneration of numbers as well as the deficiency relating to that number. As far as these kinds of disputes are concerned, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction to decide this kind of case. Hence it is found that this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide dispute regarding the mobile service. Hence as per the dictum of the apex court, at present, in General Manager, Telecom Vs. Krishnan & another we are of the view that this complaint cannot be entertained by this Forum. Hence the complaint is dismissed as not maintainable with liberty to the complainant to approach any legal authority for redressal of his grievances if any.
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.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 31st day of October 2011.
Sd/-
S.K. SREELA : MEMBER
Sd/-
G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT
Sd/-
BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER
