Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/268/2019

V. Senthil - Complainant(s)

Versus

Vodafone idea Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Party in Person

08 Dec 2022

ORDER

                                           Date of Complaint Filed : 03.10.2019

                                           Date of Reservation      : 01.12.2022

                                           Date of Order               : 08.12.2022

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                                  : PRESIDENT

                        THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,                :  MEMBER  I 

                        THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,         : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.268 /2019

THURSDAY, THE 8^th DAY OF DECEMBER 2022

V.Senthil,

15 “A” Kavingar Bharathidasan Salai,

Teynampet,

Chennai – 600 018.                                                                                                               ... Complainant                

..Vs..

The Manager,

Vodafone Idea Limited,

9^th Floor,

 TVH Pelisiya Tower,

Block 94, MRC Nagar,

Chennai – 600 028.                                                                                                                ...  Opposite Party

******

Counsel for the Complainant          : Party in person

Counsel for the Opposite Party       : M/s. AAV Partners 

 

On perusal of records and after having heard the oral arguments of the Counsel for the Complainant and the Counsel for the Opposite Party, we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by  Member-I, Thiru. T.R.Sivakumhar, B.A., B.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to direct the Opposite Party to refund a sum of Rs.709/- to the Complainant’s Bank account with interest from the Opposite Party 24% interest from the date of filing of this complaint and till the date of disposal of the complaint and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony suffered with the Opposite Party and to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards deficiency in service and unfair trade practice to the Opposite Parties along with cost.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

The case of the Complainant is that he was using Post Paid Sim of the Opposite Party for the past 8 years and had paid the bills regularly without any delay. As such he had paid the May month bill on 11.06.2019 for a sum of Rs.709/- through Paytm vide Receipt Order No. 8477778582 and Reference No. PAYTIM1106190722342YE52 and the same was not debited in his bank account. In spite of the same the outgoing calls from his SIM was stopped by the Opposite Party and his several requests to release the Outgoing calls was denied by the Opposite Party. Hence he had again paid the May month bill amount of Rs.709/- and the same was confirmed by the receipt dated 22.07.2019 vide No.CHN095R10722_58114793 by the Opposite Party and thereafter the Outgoing calls was released by the Opposite Party. Till date he has not received the May month bill amount of Rs.709/- paid by him, from the Opposite Party to his Bank Account. Though he had approached in person to the Opposite Party’s Office, the staffs had not responded properly till date, of which he had suffered mental agony, trauma and pain and the act of the Opposite Party amounts to deficiency in service. He had sent a notice on 27.07.2019 through RPAD to the Opposite Party and inspite of the same was delivered on 29.07.2019, there was no response from the Opposite Party. Hence the Complaint.

3. Written Version filed by the Opposite Party in brief is as follows:-

The subject mobile number that has been used by the Complainant for the past 8 years was not mentioned even once in the entire complaint, hence they could not comment and traversed through. As the subject mobile number was not known to them, they were unable to verify the veracity of the complaint. The mental agony, trauma and pain alleged to have been sustained by the Complainant, could not be evidenced or substantiated by merely alleging improper response from the Opposite Party’s employees. Hence the Complainant was put to strict proof of the allegations with regard to deficiency in service. The Complaint was bereft of merits and not maintainable either in facts or in law. Hence the complaint is to be dismissed.   

4.   The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents marked as  Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-6. The Opposite Parties submitted his Written Version and Proof Affidavit of Opposite Parties and no documents was marked.

Points for Consideration:-

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for the reliefs claimed in the complaint?

3. Whether the Complainant is entitled for any other relief/s?

Point No.1:-

The Contention of the Complainant is that he was using the Post Paid Sim of the Opposite Party for about 8 years and in spite of having paid the Bill amount of Rs.709/- for the month of May 2019, on 11.06.2019 as per Ex.A-1. The said payment was made through Paytm and the same was paid to the Opposite Party as per Ex.A-2. The said sum was also debited from his Bank Account as per Ex.A-3. In spite of the payment made on 11.06.2019 his outgoing calls was stopped by the Opposite Party and the same was released only when he had again paid the said Bill amount of Rs.709/- on 22.07.2019, as per Ex.A-4. In spite of his several requests made to refund the amount of Rs.709/- paid on 11.06.2019, he was constrained to send a notice dated 27.07.2019 to the Opposite Party and the said notice was delivered to the Opposite Party, as found in Ex.A-5 and Ex.A-6, respectively, there was no response from the Opposite Party.

The Contention of the Opposite Party is that the Complainant had not mentioned the subject mobile number which he had used for the past 8 years and hence they could not verify the veracity of the complaint and they could not comment as well. The mental agony, trauma and pain alleged to have been sustained by the Complainant, could not be evidenced or substantiated by merely alleging improper response from the Opposite Party’s employees. Further the Complainant has to prove the deficiency in service on their part.

On foregoing discussions and on perusal of the Exhibits marked by the Complainant in support of his complaint, though the Complainant had contended that he had paid the Bill amount of Rs.709/- for the Month of May, 2019 twice, i.e, on 11.06.2019 and 22.07.2019, Ex.A-4 the Receipt dated 22.07.2019 for payment of Rs.708/- did not reflect the period for which the said amount of Rs.708/- was paid by the Complainant, hence the contention of the Complainant that it was paid for the month of May,2019, is not legally sustainable. Further the Complainant had contended that in spite of payment made on 11.06.2019, his outgoing calls was stopped by the Opposite Party, the Complainant had not produced any material evidence to substantiate the same and hence the said contention of the Complainant is not acceptable. As the Complainant who had alleged deficiency in service on the Part of the Opposite Party, of which he had sustained mental agony, trauma and pain, had failed to prove the same. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the Opposite Party had not committed deficiency of service. Accordingly Point No.1 is answered.

Point Nos. 2 and 3 :-

As discussed and decided Point No.1 against the Complainant, the Complainant is not entitled for the reliefs claimed in the complaint and hence the Complainant is also not entitled for any other relief/s. Accordingly Point Nos.2 and 3 are answered.

In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No Cost.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 8^th of December 2022.

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1	25.05.2019	Complainant post paid bill issued by the Opposite party
Ex.A2	11.06.2019	Complainant paid the may month due paid through PAYTM to the Opposite Party
Ex.A3	-	Complainant bank statement details
Ex.A4	22.07.2019	Complainant paid may month dues to the Opposite Party receipt
Ex.A5	27.07.2019	Complainant sent letter to the Opposite Party
Ex.A6	27.07.2019	Acknowledgement receipt issued by the Postal authorities

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Party:-

NIL

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                    B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT