By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> 1. The case of complainant is that he applied for a prepaid mobile connection on 08-9-04 to 1st opposite party who is the agent of 2nd and 3rd opposite parties. He handed over photo copies of his identity card, ration card and a photo to 1st opposite party. His booking number was 2901. He has not received the SIM card till now. He prays for Rs.25,000/- as compensation.<br /> 2. 1st opposite party filed version admitting that complainant had booked for the SIM card. But no consideration was paid till date. Opposite party No.1 is only a booking counter of BSNL. The applications are usually forwarded to B.S.N.L. And the connections have to be provided by B.S.N.L. Only. After booking complainant has not come to enquire about the SIM card. 2nd and 3rd opposite parties filed joint version disputing the jurisdiction of this Forum to try the complaint. I.A.No.121/07 was filed by B.S.N.L. For stay of this case. We thought it better to consider the application along with main complaint. It is submitted in the version that B.S.N.L. is ready to provide prepaid connection within a week if he applies a fresh along with necessary documents. The other allegations in complaint are specifically denied.<br /> <br /> 3. Evidence consists of separate affidavit filed by 1st opposite party and joint affidavit filed by 2nd and 3rd opposite parties. No documents marked on either side. Complainant has not filed any affidavit.<br /> <br /> 4. Though 2nd and 3rd opposite parties dispute the jurisdiction of this Forum to try the complaint. We hold that the decision rendered in 2003 (1) KLT 817 General Manager, BSNL. Vs. Krishnan is still in force and this Forum has jurisdiction to try this complaint. I.A.No.121/07 is disposed accordingly. It is admitted by 1st opposite party that complainant had applied for a prepaid connection. Admittedly no consideration was paid. Opposite parties were willing and ready to provide prepaid SIM if the complainant pays the requisite amount and produces relevant document. But complainant does not want SIM/connection and he only wants return of documents furnished by him to 1st opposite party. He apprehends that it may be misused if it reaches wrong hands. 1st opposite party was unable to return the documents contending that they have been handed over to 2nd opposite party. Second and third opposite parties denied the same. The matter was taken up in adalath. Though opposite parties were ready to settle the matter it could be settled due to non co-operation of the complainant. Though 1st opposite party admits the receipt of documents from complainant he has not proved that they were handed over to 2nd and 3rd opposite parties. The non return of documents amounts to deficiency in service on the part of 1st opposite party. The documents are just photo copies which are not of much value. Complainant has not paid any consideration to opposite parties. In our view an amount of Rs.500/- as compensation would serve justice to complainant.<br /> <br /> 5. In the result we allow the complaint and order 1st opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) to the complainant within two months from the date of this order. We make no order as to costs.<br /> <br /> Dated this 9th day of May, 2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> <br /> Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil <br /> Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Nil<br /> Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER<br />