DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> Civil Station, Palakkad 678001, Kerala<br /> <br /> Dated this the 31st day of October, 2008<br /> <br /> Present: Smt.Seena.H, President<br /> Smt.Preetha.G.Nair, Member<br /> Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K, Member<br /> <br /> C.C.No.125/2007<br /> <br /> Muthukrishnan.S,<br /> Quarter No.192A,<br /> Behind Nursery School,<br /> Hemambika Nagar,<br /> Kallekulangara(P.O),<br /> Palakkad. - Complainant <br /> (By Adv.G.Shaji)<br /> Vs<br /> <br /> 1. Mr.Viju.P,<br /> Customer Executive,<br /> Web World,<br /> Near Head Post Office,<br /> Palakkad.<br /> <br /> 2. The Stores Manager,<br /> Reliance Web World,<br /> Metro Complex,<br /> Near Head Post Office,<br /> Palakkad.<br /> <br /> 3. Mr.Ratheesh.M,<br /> Zonal Manager,<br /> Reliancae Info Com,<br /> Mangalam Towers,<br /> Palakkad.<br /> <br /> 4. Reliance Web Stores Ltd.,<br /> E Block, Dhirubhai Ambani,<br /> Knowledge City,<br /> Thane Belapur Road,<br /> Koperkhairne,<br /> Nav Mumbai 400 709. - Opposite parties<br /> (By Adv.Jayan.C.Thomas for all opposite parties)<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> By Smt.Seena.H, President<br /> <br /> <br /> The brief of the complaint is as follows:<br /> <br /> <br /> The complainant has applied for a mobile phone connection under plan NJ124 on 29/08/2006 through the 2nd opposite party. The 2nd opposite party has given a receipt for the payment of Rs.124/- under NJ124 plan. Complainant has purchased a handset from the 1st opposite party on 31/08/2006. to obtain mobile phone connection, the petitioner has given his reliance land phone bill as his address proof to the 2nd opposite party. The complainants mobile phone number is 9388427847 and land phone number is 0491 3291975. The complainant activated his mobile phone connection on 01/09/2006. Later instead of telephone bill the complainant got an SMS. He approached the 3rd opposite party to remit the phone bill. From there he understood that the subscribers name and address in the bill is not that of his. Not only that the bill is prepared based on plan NJ199 instead of his requested plan for NJ124. The above mistakes committed by the opposite parties were brought to the notice of the 3rd opposite party and the 3rd opposite party assured the petitioner that the mistake will be corrected immediately. The petitioner enlightened the problem to the 1st opposite party also and requested to correct the mistake. No steps were taken by the opposite parties to correct the mistake. <br /> <br /> Complainant sent complaint against entry of wrong plan and the same was registered as complaint No.4178324 on 15/11/2006. Thereafter the opposite parties changed the plan from NJ199 to NJ124. But the mistake in the subscribers name and address was not corrected. Later instead of changing the subscribers name and address to that of the complainants, the opposite parties did a method of transfer of ownership in the name of the complainant by charging an amount of Rs.561/-. The complainant sent an e-mail message to www.service assurance cell @ reliance ada.com on 23/11/2006. After receipt of the said e-mail complaint, the opposite parties corrected the address to that of the complainants. But subscribers name entered as M.V.Krishnadas instead of Muthukrishnan, the complainant, was not changed. Meanwhile on 21/11/2006, the petitioner received an SMS message stating that the bill was sent to the petitioner on 15/11/2006 and if not received by him within 7 days, contact the nearest web world. The complainant did not received the bill and so he called R.W.W officials at Mangalam Towers and they informed that the bill was sent to one M.V.Krishnadas, Mankara. Later on enquiry, it was found that Mr.Krishndas.M.V never applied for any reliance phone connection from the opposite parties. In all the subsequent payment receipts, the complainant obtained his name by scoring Krishndas.M.V and attestation done by the world web officials. Even though he was getting the bill in his house address, the subscribers name is still stated as Krishnadas.M.V instead of Muthukrishnan.S. Subsequent telephone bill for the month of April <br /> <br /> 2007 was received by the complainant on 11/04/2007, in which the subscribers name was seen corrected. But in the address portion, the quarter number is changed to 192 instead of 192A, the name of the post office is changed to Olavakkode instead of Kallekulangara and the name of the state is changed from Kerala to Andra Pradesh. According to the complainant, the act of the opposite parties amounts to clear deficiency of service. Hence the complaint.<br /> <br /> Notice was served on the opposite parties. Vakalath was filed on behalf of all the opposite parties and thereafter there was no representation. Version also not filed.<br /> <br /> The evidence adduced consists of the proof affidavit and Exts.A1 to Ext.A9 on the side of complainant.<br /> <br /> The issue for consideration are;<br /> 1.Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?<br /> 2.If so, what is the reliefs and costs?<br /> <br /> Issues No.1 & 2:<br /> <br /> The case of the complainant is that he has availed a mobile phone connection through the 2nd opposite party under NJ 124 plan on 29/08/2006 and purchased a hand set from the 1st opposite party on 31/08/2006. This is evident from the Ext.A1 and A2. The land phone bill of the complainant given as address proof is marked as Ext.A3. Complainant is regularly paying his mobile phone bills which is evident from Ext.A5 and Ext.A4, mobile bills and receipts respectively. Complainant directly made complaint regarding the entry of wrong name and address to the opposite parties and finally a lawyer notice dated 21/04/2007 was issued to be opposite parties which is evident from Ext.A7 and Ext.A6 respectively. Even though sufficient opportunities were given, the opposite parties has not cared to correct the mistake. The definite case of the complainant is that name and address of the subscriber in the phone bill and receipt is not that of the complainant's. This is crystal clear from the mobile phone bills and receipts which is marked as Ext.A5 series and Ext.A4 series. Four bills from August 2006 to November 2006 bears the name and address of Muthukrishnan.S. There after bill dtd.11/01/2007, 11/02/2007 and 11/03/2007 is seen to be issued in the address of the complainant. But the subscribers name is that of Krishnadas.M.V. The complainant as stated in the affidavit and seen from Ext.A4 receipts made payments by scoring the wrong name and <br /> <br /> entering his name which the opposite party attested. Again the bill dtd.11/04/2007 is addressed to the complainant Muthukrishnan. But the following mistakes were seen. The quarter number shown is wrong. The post office is changed from Kallekulangara to Olavakkode. The state is changed from Kerala to Andhra Pradesh. Again a lawyer notice dtd.21/04/2007 was issued by the complainant to all the opposite parties (Marked as Ext.A6) for which a reply notice was issued stating the grievance of the complainant has been settled.<br /> <br /> The act of the opposite parties amounts to grave deficiency of service on their part. Opposite parties took a period of 8 months to correct a mistake in the address which was pointed out by the complainant at the first instance itself. The opposite parties ought to have corrected the mistake in the 2nd bill itself. Instead the opposite parties made complainant suffer for a period of 8 months. Though complaints were made to all of the opposite parties none of them took any steps to rectify the mistake.<br /> <br /> In view of the above discussions, the forum holds the view that the act of opposite parties amounts to clear deficiency of service on their part and all the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to compensate the complainant. We are of the view that this is a fit case to award punitive damages.<br /> <br /> In the result complaint is allowed. Opposite parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.1,000/- as cost of the proceedings within one month from the date of communication of the order failing which the whole amount shall carry an interest @ 12% per annum from the date of order till realisation.<br /> <br /> Pronounced in the open court on this the 31st day of October, 2008 <br /> <br /> (Sd)<br /> Seena.H <br /> President<br /> <br /> (Sd)<br /> Preetha.G.Nair <br /> Member<br /> <br /> (Sd)<br /> Bhanumathi.A.K <br /> Member<br /> <br /> Appendix<br /> <br /> Exhibits marked on the side of complainant <br /> Ext.A1 – Retail invoice issued by opposite party to complainant dtd.31.08.2006<br /> Ext.A2 – Receipt issued by opposite party to complainant dtd.31.08.2006<br /> Ext.A3 – Land phone bill issued by opposite party to complainant <br /> Ext.A4 Series (9 in Nos.) - Bill receipt issued by opposite party to complainant <br /> Ext.A5 Series (8 in Nos.) - Bill issued by opposite party to complainant <br /> Ext.A6 – True copy of lawyer notice sent by complainant <br /> Ext.A7 – Copy of e-mail sent to opposite party by complainant <br /> Ext.A8 Series (4 in Nos.) - Acknowledgement cards signed by opposite party <br /> Ext.A9 – Reply notice sent by opposite party to complainant <br /> Exhibits marked on the side of opposite parties <br /> Nil<br /> Costs (allowed)<br /> Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) allowed as cost of the proceedings<br /> <br />