Sri B.Sai Kalyan Chakravarthy, S/o.B.Krishna Rao,
Aged about 28 years, Occ:Advocate,
H.No.11-3-267/77,
Opp.S.R.Hospitals,
Madhuranagar,
Parsigutta,
Secunderabad-61. …Complainant
And
Relience Communications Broad Band,
Rep. by its Manager/Person-in-charge,
4-1333, Sagar Plaza, 3rd Floor,
Abids, Hyderabad – 001 ... Opposite Party

O R D E R

(per Hon’ble Member, Smt Lakshmi Makena, on behalf of the Bench)

1. This is a complainant filed under section 12 of C.P. act 1986, seeking directions against opposite party to:-
a. To pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-towards compensation for causing physical strain, mental agony and financial suffer.
b. To cancel the bill amount of Rs.1,468/-mentioned in the bill dt.11-02-2008 and
c. To pay a sum of Rs.5,000/-towards the costs of the complainant.

2. The case of the complainant is that the complainant had paid a sum of Rs.500/- (Rs.Five hundred only) to the opposite party by way cheque towards installation charges of internet connection. He had selected the plan of Rs.450/- monthly rent. Under the said plan the opposite party agreed to provide the facilities such as speed-75 Kbps, Usage browsing and Down loading unlimited and benefit free land phone + Rs.50/- talk time.

3. After 4 or 5 days from the day of collecting the above referred amount, the opposite party has provided internet connection to the complainant and also issued I.D.No.278585159784. The said internet connection discontinued within 15 minutes after installation on the same day. Therefore the complainant has made a Complaint to the concerned authorities of the opposite party, but the defects in he said internet connection were not rectified. Since inception the said internet has not been functioning and opposite party has not yet provided free land phone to complainant as agreed and the complainant could not communicate with his relatives who are residing in abroad. The Complainant further submitted that his mother was admitted in NIMS, Hyderabad for about 10 days in the month of November and December, 2007 with health problem but due to the defect in the said internet connection, the complainant has faced much problem to contact his family member and his relatives who are residing in USA and UK on several occasions.

4. Finally the complainant got issued a lawyer’s notice dated 17-12-2007 by mentioning the facts with a request to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation through R PAD bearing No.6298 dated 18-12-2007. The concerned postal authorities vide its letter dated 06-02-2008 informed that the said notice was served on the Opposite party on 19-12-2007, but inspite of receipt of the said notice, the opposite party has not given any response or reply.

5. The complainant was forced to take internet connection from BSNL, Hyderabad, which was installed on 29-12-2007. From the day of installation of internet connection, the B.S.N.L. has not been providing internet facility in proper and in perfect manner. The complainant has been availing the internet facility from BSNL only. The BSNL issued a bill date 08-02-2008 for Rs.1,418/-. The complainant recently received a bill dated 11-02-2008 from the opposite party for a total sum of Rs.1,468/- on receipt of the said bill the complainant was shocked and surprised. The opposite party without providing internet facility to the complainant has issued the above referred bill in an harassing manner which is unfair trade practice. It is submitted that the complainant has been availing internet facility provided by the BSNL. The opposite party has not been providing the said facility. Hence the complaint.

6. As the subject internet connection is kept live, the complainant is bound to pay the monthly rentals so raised, not withstanding the alleged non-usage of the connection. The opposite party submitted that the complaint is free will and choice. The complainant of his own violation chose not to avail the internet connection of the opposite party though the same is ACTIVE as on date. The opposite party cannot be faulted for not using the same and opposite party cannot be termed to have indulged in unfair trade practice.

7. The complainant has no cause of action. The present complaint is frivolous besides being speculative which factor is borne out from the exorbitant relief’s claimed by the complainant. Finally, it is prayed that the complainant be dismissed with heavy costs.

8. To substantiate his case, the complainant has filed his evidence affidavit and relied on Exs.A1 to A7.

Ex.A1 is the Reliance communications Broad band Tarif, Ex.A2 is the Service activation report wiring details, Ex.A3 is the Letter from complainant to Reliance Communications, Ex.A4 is the settled report pre view, Ex.A5 is the information to customers, Ex.A6 is the Reliance broad band bills and Ex.A7 is the Discharge record.

9.Point for Consideration are :-
1.Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and
2.Whether the complainant is entitled for the releifs prayed for?

10. Perused the material on record. It is an admitted fact that the complainant has paid, Rs.500/- to the opposite party on 02-11-2007 for an internet connection and selected a plan of Rs.450/- towards monthly charges. the complainant alleged that after allotting an I.D. number the internet connection was given but discontinued within 15 minutes after installation on the same day. As no action was taken by the concerned authorities of opposite party, the complainant issued a legal notice on 17-12-2007. The opposite party received the said notice but failed to respond. The complainant also alleged that the opposite party without rectifying the internet services raised a bill for Rs.1,468/-.

The complainant filed the Broad band tariff, final activation advice, the legal notice dt.17-12-2007, the BSNL bill dt.08-02-2008 and Reliance bill dt.11-02-2008 which are marked as Exs.A1 to A7 respectively.

The opposite party countered the allegations of the complainant by stating that the bill raised for Rs.1,468/- is monthly rental charges accumulated and as long as the internet connection is kept alive, the complainant is bound to pay the monthly rentals not withstanding the alleged non usage of the internet connection.

As per Ex.A1 the Complainant can avail the unlimited usage of browsing and down loading on payment of monthly charges of Rs.450/-. As per Ex.A2 the internet services are activated and the opposite party issued a bill for Rs.1,468/- towards the outstanding monthly charges which is marked as Ex.A6. So, there is nothing wrong on the part of opposite party.

11. Under the circumstances there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the complainant is not entitled for any of the reliefs as sought for and hence it is decided to dismiss the complaint without costs.