Surinder Kumar complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 requiring the opposite parties to restore the call facilities of connection No. 98886-95762 and to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for harassment, inconvenience with costs of the complaint. <br /> 2. The complainant averred in his complaint that some month ago the complainant purchased two mobile connections numbers 98886-12431 and 98886-12432 of opposite party No. 2 through opposite party No. 1 under Youth Welfare Society Scheme. Some time back another scheme known as Helpmate 2 scheme was launched by the opposite party No. 2 which was more beneficial for the complainant. So he approached the opposite party No. 1 on 15/1/2007 and requested to close the above mentioned two connections and issue two other connections under Helpmate Scheme. They issued two new connections numbers 98886-95760 and 98886-95762 and promised that the previous connections would be closed within few days. On 23/1/2007 the outgoing call facility of the above referred two new connections was withdrawn without informing the complainant, when the complainant approached the opposite party No. 1 to inquire about the cause of withdrawing the outgoing call facility, he was told that some amount pertaining to the previous connections was outstanding. The complainant requested that it was unlawful to withdraw the outgoing call facility without notice as the complainant never refused to pay the outstanding amount which was allegedly due. He told that the he was ready to pay the outstanding amount if any. Then the opposite parties restarted the call facility of connection No. 98886-95760 immediately. On 6/2/2007 the complainant approached the opposite party No. 1 to deposit the outstanding amount. The opposite party No. 1 told the complainant that Rs.302/- and Rs.508/- were due regarding the connection No. 98886-12431 and 98886-12432 respectively. The opposite party No. 1 advised the complainant to deposit Rs.52/- and Rs.258/- as the amount of security of Rs.250/- each pertaining to above connections was already with the opposite parties would be adjusted in the bills. So the complainant deposited Rs.52/- and Rs.258/- vide receipt No. 553 and 554 dated 6/2/2007 and the opposite party No. 1 assured that the outgoing call facility of connection No. 98886-95762 would be restarted soon. The complainant informed the opposite party No. 2 also vide fax message dated 7/2/2007. But since then the outgoing call facility has not been restored till date. The complainant visited the opposite party No. 1 many times and contacted the opposite party No. 2 over its customer care centre number at least 20 times but each time each of the opposite parties put off the complainant saying that he should contact the other opposite party. After that the incoming call facility of connection No. 98886-95762 has also been withdrawn without assigning any reason or informing the complainant. It is clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties to illegally withdraw outgoing and incoming call facility. The complainant had face harassment, inconvenience and mental agony due to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties for which the complainant is entitled to the tune of Rs.20,000/- besides costs of the complaint. Hence this complaint. <br /> 3. The counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 2-3-2007 complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties. <br /> 4. On receipt of the notice the opposite party No. 1 appeared through Sh. Atul Gupta Advocate on 30/3/2007 but on 9/5/2007 Sh. Atul Gupta Advocate pleaded no instructions from the opposite party No. 1 despite giving information to them about the date. After that notice was again issued to opposite party No. 1 but the opposite party No. 1 not appeared despite of service so the opposite party No. 1 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 8/6/2007. The opposite party No. 2 appeared through Sh. A.K. Monga Advocate and filed written reply taking preliminary objections that the complainant has not placed true facts before the Forum. The outstanding amount in relation to the previous connections 98886-12431 and 98886-12432 was pending to the tune of Rs.302/- and Rs.508/- and for that reason outgoing facility was withdrawn by the opposite party. Only on 23/1/2007 the outgoing calls of the existing services was terminated because of the non payment of the outstanding amount against the complainant with regard to earlier connections. On 6/2/2007 the complainant has deposited the amount of Rs.52/- and Rs.258/- to the opposite party but as per version of the complainant itself that outstanding amount on 23/1/2007 was Rs.810/- and he deposit only Rs.310/- so still he has not made the full and final payment within the due date mentioned therein. Moreover the opposite party has not given any assurance that the security amount would be adjusted against the outstanding amount. So the liability lies with him for non payment of the outstanding amount against the bills within the due date. As per terms and conditions of the agreement form the parties has agreed that in case of any dispute the jurisdiction would vests with the Courts at Delhi and not at Faridkot. So this Forum has got no jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint. The complainant failed to pay the amount despite repeated requests and reminder as such the outgoing call of the complainant were rightly barred under the agreement. On merits the opposite party No. 2 submitted that unless a written request was made by the complainant till then the connections cannot be disconnected and further the same is subject to the clearance of the dues if any pending in respect of those connections. It is false that the complainant had made a full and final payment of the said numbers, but actual position is that the complainant had not made the full payment since last November which is amounting to Rs.810/-. So there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party No. 2 so there is no question of any compensation to the complainant. So the complaint be dismissed with costs. <br /> 5. Both the parties wanted to lead evidence to prove their respective pleadings and proper opportunity was given to them. The complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of receipt dated 6/2/2007 Ex.C-2, copy of receipt dated 6/2/2007 for Rs.258/- Ex.C-3, copy of letter Ex.C-4, copy of fax receipt Ex.C-5 and closed his evidence. <br /> 6. In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant the opposite party No. 2 tendered in evidence affidavit of Ashutosh Kalia Assistant Manager of Hutchison Essar South Ltd. Ex.R-1 but the opposite party No. 2 failed to complete the evidence despite of last opportunity granted so the evidence of the opposite party no. 2 was closed by order of the Forum vide order dated 25/9/2007.<br /> 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have very carefully gone through the affidavits and documents on the file. Our observations and findings are as under.<br /> 8. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the opposite parties have illegally barred outgoing and incoming calls facility of mobile connection No. 98886-95762. So the complainant is entitled to compensation and damages on account of mental tension and harassment caused by the opposite parties on account of deficiency of services to be provided by the opposite parties to the complainant. <br /> 9. Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has submitted that complainant has not cleared outstanding dues of the previous connections No. 98886-12431 and 98886-12432 so outgoing and incoming calls facility was not to be provided by the opposite party No 2 to the complainant. <br /> 10. In his affidavit Ex.C-1 Surinder Kumar complainant substantiated his pleadings to the effect that as per demand of opposite parties he has deposited amount of Rs.52/- and Rs.258/- respectively vide receipt no. 553 and 554 on 6/2/2007 as outstanding amount of previous connections. The security of Rs.500/- with regard to both of the previous connections was to be adjusted. The opposite parties having received entire amount have withdrawn outgoing call facility and has not restored till date. <br /> 11. The opposite parties received Rs.52/- vide receipt Ex.C-2 in respect of connection No. 98886-12431 and Rs.252/- in respect of connection No. 98886-12432. Complainant moved application Ex.C-4 to the opposite parties with regard to deposit of above noted amounts and for restoration of incoming and outgoing facility in the latest mobile connections. The opposite parties have received these amounts as full and final payment. The opposite parties have not placed on the file any bill with regard to outstanding amount of the previous connections. So it is held that the opposite parties have illegally stopped incoming and outgoing calls from the new connection of the complainant. So there is clear cut deficiency of services on the part of the opposite parties due to which the complainant has suffered mentally and economically. <br /> 12. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances the complaint is accepted. Accordingly the opposite parties are directed to restore the outgoing and incoming facility on the mobile connection No. 98886-95762 of the complainant and to pay Rs.2000/- as compensation to the complainant, within the period of one month from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the opposite parties shall pay interest on the amount of Rs.2000/- at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the decision of the complaint till the realization of the amount. Both the parties are jointly and severally liable for this amount. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.<br /> Announced in open Forum:<br /> Dated: 4/10/2007<br />