CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION – X
GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI
Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel)
New Delhi – 110016
Case No.90/2016
GAURAV AGARWAL
N-192, SECOND FLOOR
ARJUN NAGAR, SAFDARJUNG ENCLAVE
NEW DELHI 110029 …..COMPLAINANT
Vs.
TIKONA DIGITAL NETWORKS PRIVATE LIMITED
225, 3RD FLOOR, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE PHASE 3,
NEW DELHI- 110020. …..RESPONDENTS
Date of Institution-02.03.2016
Date of Order-31.05.2024
O R D E R
Dr. RAJENDER DHAR-MEMBER
The complaint pertains to deficiency in service on the part of OP with respect to wireless broadband connectivity.
Brief facts as stated in the complaint are that complainant purchased the Tikona Internet connection ID 1113237274 from 03.05.2015 but due to the highly unreliable nature of Internet services offered by OP, complainant could never do his job at critical moments.
Complainant has further submitted that due to serious connectivity problem in the internet provide by the OP, the complainant lost many assignments and also lost incentive thereupon due to this, his professional reputation was damaged which led to mental and emotional trauma.
It is further submitted that OP always harassed complainant. Thereafter, when complainant requested for termination of the said connection, officials of OP again harassed the complainant. Thereafter, complainant lodged complaints by e-mails to customer care, Nodal and Appellate officer. On phone OP had agreed to resolve the problem and agreed to settle the dues. Despite assurance of resolving the problem on phone and agreeing to settle the dues, OP disagreed to resolve the issue and further imposed burden of dues on him. OP harassed the complainant with warning sent through SMS’s and inflated bills were also sent every month till February, 2016. Thereafter, OP started calling the complainant from different numbers and different people introduced themselves as advocates from different cities and courts and also, they forcefully warned the complainant to give them money, otherwise the OP will proceed against him in the court.
It is further submitted that calls from recovery agents and advocates has caused a lot of mental and physical trauma to the complainant and this has disturbed his professional as well as personal life.
On 25.04.2016, Sh. Ramesh Kumar Sharma (Liaison officer appointed by OP- Tikona) submitted false documents before the Hon’ble Court which is wrong as per law. Copy of false documents attached in Annexure-I.
It is further submitted that the Hon’ble Court had directed the parties for mediation. On the first date i.e. 18.03.2016 and as suggested by the Mediator on 21.06.2016, complainant returned all the property of Tikona i.e. equipment on 21.06.2016 but the complaint was not resolved. Copy of receipt attached is Annexure-II.
Complainant has prayed for:
- Refund of installation charges for Rs.750/-.
- Refund of charges of last month’s payment for Rs.570/- (since services not used).
- Charges of loss of work (direct/indirect) for Rs.53,770/-.
- Compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and harassment.
Complainant has prayed for total amount of Rs.1,55,090/- with interest @18% per annum which includes litigation expenses, official loss by taking leaves, mental and physical damages etc. etc.
OP in their reply has stated that complainant has taken services with internet connectivity with plan ADBBM2M500 on 03.05.2015 and has been consistently using the service till 09.09.2015.
On 22.09.2015 complainant requested for disconnection of the connectivity to appellate authority since the complainant was unable to use services from 26.08.2015 till 25.09.2015 and wanted refund for the same.
OP has further stated that the complainant has sent an email to appellate authority via non-registered email id. OP was willing to provide a resolution of the complaint but same could not be possible since the complainant had not sent email from his registered email ID hence, the appellate authority was unable to address the complaint/grievances.
OP has further stated that complainant had been asked to send his complaint from his registered email ID but the same was not sent by the complainant. Copy of registered email is Annexed as Annexure-1.
It has been contended by the OP that on 22.09.2015 request for disconnection was received from complainant and accordingly Customer Care department contacted him on 29.09.2015 for resolving his complaint but the complainant insisted for disconnection and was not ready for resolution of his complaint.
Since, the complainant had used the services till 09.09.2015 and the request for disconnection was received from the complainant 22.09.2015. Therefore, the complainant was to pay full usage charges for full month of September 2015 and accordingly, rental for the period 26.08.2015 to 25.09.2015 were charged to the complainant.
OP proceeded to disconnect as per the complainant’s request but was unable to do so. Since, the complainant denied surrendering the modem and hence, his full and final settlement could not take place. Later on, the complainant surrendered the modem at Delhi Mediation Centre on 21.06.2016 and hence, there is no amount payable to the complainant.
Complainant has filed evidence by way of affidavit and has exhibited the following documents:-
- Connection ID no. 1113237274, order receipt are exhibited as Ex.C/1.
- Copies of emails are exhibited as Ex.C/2 to Ex.C/9.
OP has filed evidence by way of affidavit and has exhibited the following documents:-
- Session history of the services is annexed as Annexure 1.
- Copy of email is annexed as Annexure 2.
- Copy of policy regarding modem is annexed as Annexure-3.
Complainant has filed his written arguments and has reiterated the contents of the complaint.
OP in its written arguments has denied all the averments, contentions and allegations made in the complaint.
Based on the documents on file written submissions of both the parties, it is admitted that the complainant had taken a wireless broadband connection/ services from the OP, same has not been denied by the OP. Also, with respect to erratic, poor and unreliable nature of internet connectivity faced by the complainant, OP has not denied the same. It is also clear that the complainant has suffered a loss of business and reputation due to poor/ non-connectivity of broadband services. It is also clear that complainant was not satisfied with the services and had requested repeatedly for termination of the services/ connection but same was not adhered to rather the OP continued to saddle the complainant with bills, even, though the connectivity was very poor. Complainant has also filed CD and its transcript which shows there have been series of discussions/ chats between the complainant and the OP regarding the same.
It is also seen that OP also harassed the complainant through various methods including through SMS’s/ messages/ emails and also through various advocates and other unidentified persons which caused harassment and mental trauma to the complainant. It is also clearly seen that although the instalment charges are Rs.750/- only and last month’s bills is only for Rs.570/-. But despite that it is seen that OP has been consistently harassing the complaint and despite request of the complainant, OP has not refunded the said amount rather OP has been making all out efforts and pressuring the complainant and not resolving his complaint.
Under these circumstances, this Commission is of considered view that due to poor connectivity/ poor services of broadband connectivity provided by the OP amounts to deficiency in services and also keeping in view the conduct of the OP i.e. pressuring and threatening the complainant through various unidentified sources/ persons amounts to unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. Therefore, this Commission directs the OP to pay:
- To refund of last month payment of Rs.570/-.
- To pay compensation for an amount of Rs.25,000/- towards loss of work due to poor connectivity.
- To pay an amount of Rs.15,000/- on account of mental agony, harassment and inconvenience faced by the complainant.
Order to be complied within 30 days from the date of order. Order to be uploaded on confonet. File be consigned to record room.
