Date of Filing:18.10.2008<br /> Date of Order:13.01.2009<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2009<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2251 OF 2008<br /> <br /> <br /> Shivakumar H.R.<br /> 2nd Main, Muneshwara Nagar<br /> Opp. Crackers Godown<br /> Bangalore 560 091 Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> 1. Head Office<br /> Bharti Airtel Limited<br /> (A Bharti Enterprise)<br /> Qutab Ambience<br /> Mehrauli Road<br /> New Delhi 110 030<br /> <br /> 2. Branch Office<br /> Bharti Airtel Limited<br /> # 55, Divyasree Towers<br /> Bannerghatta Main Road<br /> Bangalore 560 029 Opposite Parties<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This complaint is filed by the complainant. <br /> The facts of the case are that the complainant is a customer of Airtel Service. Opposite party has sent a wrong statement bill through e-mail for September month. The opposite party has charged around Rs. 444/- extra amount on his bill. Airtel Service Provider executives are calling complainant and harassing him to pay the bill amount. The complainant submitted that due to harassment by the opposite party he needs compensation of Rs. 2,000/-.<br /> 2. Notice issued to opposite party. Opposite party put in appearance through advocate and defence version filed stating that it is true that complainant is the subscriber of opposite party to the mobile No. 9731133668. It is true that opposite party has issued bill on 04.10.2008 for Rs. 863/-. Complainant has paid the said bill amount without protest. However, the complainant has approached this forum that bill is not proper which is not sustainable in the eye of law. Hence, the opposite party has prayed to dismiss the complaint.<br /> 3. Arguments are heard.<br /> 4. As per the defence version the complainant has paid the bill amount of Rs. 863/- without any protest. Therefore, the complaint is not maintainable. The grievance of the complainant appears to be that the opposite party staff is harassing him and they are calling him twice or thrice a day and demanded to pay the bill amount. Therefore, he has sought compensation of Rs.2,000/- for harassment. Admittedly, the complainant has paid the bill amount. Therefore, there is absolutely no dispute over the payment. If really the opposite party staff is harassing the complainant it is very bad. The opposite party is not entitled in law to harass or give threat to the customers or consumers. The service providers should treat the customers with respect and dignity. Consumer was the boss, is at present and will be in future. He is the most important visitor in the premises of opposite party. He is not dependent on the service provider. On the other hand the service provider is dependent on the customer or consumer. Therefore, the opposite party shall not harass consumers in any manner. If at all there is any dispute in respect of payment of bill etc. it should be settled legally in a civilized manner without harassing the customers. If the consumer or customer did not get satisfactory resolution of his dispute at the customer service center he can approach the nodal officers and settle the issue within 48 working hours. As a final mechanism for grievance resolution the customer may contact the Appellate Authority constituted by the Airtel Company. So under these circumstances if the complainant has got any grievance with the staff of the Airtel he has to approach the Nodal officers for settlement of the issue. Any how in this case there is no dispute and bill amount has been paid by the complainant before filing complaint. The only allegation made by the complainant is in respect of harassment. As already noted above the opposite party and their staff should not give any harassment to the complainant. With this observation the complaint deserves to be dismissed. In the result I proceed to pass the following:<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 5. The Complaint is dismissed.<br /> 6. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 7. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2009. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER<br />