Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/143/2014

R.K.Ramesh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Y.R.K.Solutions - Opp.Party(s)

S.Muthuraman

22 Nov 2019

ORDER

                                                                             Date of filing      : 01.04.2014

                                                                               Date of Disposal : 22.11.2019

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP.  : MEMBER

 

C.C. No.143/2014

DATED THIS FRIDAY THE 22^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019

                                 

Mr. R.K. Ramesh,

S/o. Mr. R. Radhakrishnan,

Plot No.35, F3, Sri Gayathri Flats,

Sudharsan Nagar 3^rd Street,

Madambakkam,

Chennai – 600 126.                                                        .. Complainant.

                                                                                          ..Versus..

 

 

1. The Proprietor,

Y.R.K. Solutions,

Flat No.1-A, Shifa Arcade,

Bharathi Nagar 1^st Street,

T. Nagar,

Chennai – 600 017.

 

2. The Appellate Officer,

TATA Docomo,

TATA Teleservices Ltd.,

13^th Floor, Prince Info City 2,

No.283-284, OMR Kandhanchavadi,

Chennai – 600 096.                                                 ..  Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the complainant           : M/s. S. Muthuraman & others

Counsel for the 1^st opposite party  : Ex-parte

2^nd opposite party                           : M/s. Shivakumar & Suresh

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to return a sum of Rs.3,034/- with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. from 19.12.2012 to till the date of realisation and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he purchased a TATA Photon plus Data Card from the 1^st opposite party on 19.12.2012 and paid a sum of Rs.999/-.  The complainant submits that the said Data card was activated by the opposite party at the end of December 2012 with the phone No.9281049555.  The complainant submits that he purchased the Data card mainly to work in his residential address bearing Plot No.35, F3, Sudharsan Nagar 3^rd Street, Madambakkam, Chennai – 600 126. The complainant submits that as per the terms and conditions of the network connection, no Data card will be provided in the area or location or in the area in which, no network coverage or even in the area in which weak network coverage of TATA photon.   The complainant submits that from the date of activation of the Data card there was no coverage or signal received in Madambakkam area which caused huge loss and mental agony.   The complainant submits that he is a computer network dependent for his livelihood and due to the failure of network coverage he suffered a lot day by day.   Hence, the complainant informed the fact of no coverage or shortage of signal through email to the opposite parties.  The opposite parties also sent a technical person on 18.05.2013 and checked the network coverage of Madambakkam area.  The complainant submits that since there is no coverage and no signal received, the complainant was compelled to surrender the connection and sent a letter dated:30.07.2018 to the 2^nd opposite party claiming refund of the amount remitted in the month of December 2012 to May 2013 totally a sum of Rs.3,035/- and cost of Data card of Rs.999/-.  But the opposite party without refunding the amount, made a bill for a sum of Rs.315/- for which, the complainant has not used the Data card due to no signal, no activation and no coverage.   The act of the opposite parties 1 & 2 amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice which caused great mental agony.  Hence, the complaint is filed.

2.     Inspite of receipt of notice, the 1^st opposite party has not appeared before this Forum and hence, the 1^st opposite party is set ex-parte.

3.      The brief averments in the written version filed by 2^nd opposite party is as follows:

The 2^nd opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and put the complainant to strict proof of the same.    The 2^nd opposite party states that the complainant purchased a Tata Photon Plus Data Card from the 1^st opposite party and the date of activation of the Data Card was activated from 22.12.2012.   The 2^nd opposite party states that the alleged terms of network is not known to the 2^nd opposite party.   The 2^nd opposite party states that the allegation that there is no coverage of signal received from Madambakkam area is not correct.  The 2^nd opposite party states that from the Fault Completion Report, it is proved that he had speed problem on his data card and hence, the 1^st opposite party referred the issue to the network team for further course of action and hence, the grievance of the complainant is only on speed problem and not on signal as alleged by him.  The 2^nd opposite party states that the claim of Rs.315/- is imaginary which is paid towards the erection of TATA Photon Data card.   The 2^nd opposite party states that the bill for a sum of Rs.315/- for the month of May 2013 and Rs.275/- for the month of July 2013 generated for usage of TATA Proton Data card.   The 2^nd opposite party states that he has availed and used the connection from December 2012 and paid the bill and now asking for refund of the same which was not at all permissible.   Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the 2^nd opposite party and hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the 2^nd opposite party is filed and documents Ex.B1 & Ex.B2 are marked on the side of the 2^nd opposite party.

 

5.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to get return of a sum of Rs.3,034/- with interest at the rate of 24% as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost as prayed for?

6.      On point:-

Inspite of receipt of notice, the 1^st opposite party has not appeared before this Forum and the 1^st opposite party remained ex-parte.  The Counsels for the complainant and 2^nd opposite party filed their respective written arguments.  Heard their respective Counsels also.  Perused the records namely; the complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.  The complainant pleaded and contended that he purchased a TATA Photon plus Data Card from the 1^st opposite party on 19.12.2012 and paid a sum of Rs.999/- as per Ex.A1.  Further the contention of the complainant is that the said Data card was activated by the opposite party at the end of December 2012 with the phone No.9281049555.  Further the contention of the complainant is that he purchased the Data card mainly to work in his residential address bearing Plot No.35, F3, Sudharsan Nagar 3^rd Street, Madambakkam, Chennai – 600 126.  Further the contention of the complainant is that as per the terms and conditions of the network connection if no Data card will be provided in the area or location or in the area in which no network coverage of TATA photon which is not denied by the opposite parties.   Further the contention of the complainant is that from the date of activation of the Data card there was no coverage or signal received in Madambakkam area which caused huge loss and mental agony.  

7.     Further the contention of the complainant is that he is a computer network dependent for his livelihood and due to the failure of network coverage he suffered a lot day by day.   Hence, the complainant informed the fact of no coverage or shortage of signal through email to the opposite parties.   The opposite parties also sent a technical person on 18.05.2013 and checked the network coverage of Madambakkam area as per Ex.A2.  But on a careful perusal of Ex.A2, FCR (Fault Completion Report), Resolution Details, it is very clear that “Speed problem Connecting at the speed of 50 kbps Routed to network”.   Further the contention of the complainant is that since there is no coverage and no signal received, the complainant was compelled to surrender the connection and sent a letter dated:30.07.2013 to the opposite parties 1 & 2 claiming refund of the amount remitted in the month of December 2012 to May 2013 totally a sum of Rs.3,035/- and cost of Data card of Rs.999/- as per Ex.A3 & Ex.A4.  But the opposite party without refunding the amount, made a bill for a sum of Rs.315/- for which, the complainant has not used the Data card due to no signal, no activation, no coverage proves the deficiency in service.  The complainant issued lawyer notice to the opposite parties 1 & 2 dated:07.09.2013 as per Ex.A5.  But opposite parties received the same as per Ex.A6 & Ex.A7 and the 1^st opposite party along sent reply dated:16.09.2013 as per Ex.A8 with vague denial.  The complainant is claiming a sum of Rs.3,034/- with interest and compensation of Rs.15,000/-.

8.     The learned Counsel for the 2^nd opposite party would contend that admittedly, the complainant purchased a Tata Photon Plus Data Card from the 1^st opposite party and the date of activation of the Data Card was done from 22.12.2012.   Further the contention of the 2^nd opposite party is that the alleged terms of network is not known to the 2^nd opposite party; is not acceptable because, the 2^nd opposite party shall come under the Telegraph Act.   Further the contention of the 2^nd opposite party is that the allegation that there is no coverage of signal received from Madambakkam area is not correct.  But on a careful perusal of Ex.A2, FCR (Fault Completion Report), Resolution Details, it is very clear that “Speed problem Connecting at the speed of 50 kbps Routed to network”.  Further the contention of the 2^nd opposite party is that from the Fault Completion Report, it is proved that there is a question of speed problem alone and not on signal problem; is not acceptable because TATA Photon Plus Data Card was purchased by the complainant only for the purpose of carrying out some work through computer network.  Admittedly, slow speed itself is a deficiency in service which amounts to no coverage or no signal. 

9.     Further the contention of the 2^nd opposite party is that the claim of Rs.315/- is imaginary which is paid towards the erection of TATA Photon Plus Data card.  But knowing fully well there is no Data connection or network connection or signal or coverage sanctioning TATA Photon Plus Data Card connection is a unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.  Further the contention of the 2^nd opposite party is that the bill for a sum of Rs.315/- for the month of May 2013 and Rs.275/- for the month of July 2013 generated for usage of TATA Photon Plus Data card.  But it is apparently clear from the records that there is no signal and there is no coverage.  Under such circumstances, there shall not be any usage of network.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties 1 & 2 shall refund a sum of Rs.3,034/- being monthly bill remitted and cost of Data card to the complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to refund a sum of Rs.3,034/- (Rupees Three thousand and thirty four only) being monthly bills remitted and cost of Data card to the complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) to the complainant.

The above amounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 22^nd day of November 2019. 

 

MEMBER                                                                                PRESIDENT

 

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.A1	19.12.2012	Copy of invoice issued by the 1st opposite party
Ex.A2	12.05.2013	Copy of Fault Completion Report
Ex.A3	30.07.2013	Copy of letter issued by the complainant to 1st opposite party
Ex.A4	30.07.2013	Copy of letter issued by the complainant to 2nd opposite party
Ex.A5	07.09.2013	Copy of legal notice issued by the complainant’s Counsel to the opposite parties 1 & 2
Ex.A6	12.09.2013	Copy of acknowledgement of the 1st opposite party for the receipt of legal notice dated:07.09.2013
Ex.A7	12.09.2013	Copy of acknowledgement of the 2nd opposite party for the receipt of legal notice dated:07.09.2013
Ex.A8	16.09.2013	Copy of reply issued by the 1st opposite party

 

2^ND OPPOSITE PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:-  

Ex.B1		Copy of Satellite Map of the opposite parties network coverage area
Ex.B2		Copy of bills for the period from November 2012 to June 2013

 

 

 

MEMBER                                                                                                                                                             PRESIDENT