Date of Filling: 24.04.2017
Date of Disposal: 02.11.2018
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
THIRUVALLUR-1
PRESENT: THIRU.S.PANDIAN, B.Sc., L.L.M. ….PRESIDENT
THIRU:R.BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc.L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP., …MEMBER
CC No.26/2017
FRIDAY, THE 02nd DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018
Mr.K.Sivan, aged about 56 years
S/o.A.Kuzhandaivelan,
101, V Cross Street, Ganesh Avenue,
Sakthi Nagar, Porur - 600 116. ……Complainant.
//Vs//
1.The Authorized Manager,
Circle Office - MTS
M/s. Sistema Shyam Teleservices limited,
Ambit it park, 2nd Floor,
No.32, A&B Industrial Estate,
Ambattur, Chennai - 600 058.
2.The Authorised person, M/S. MTS,
Registered Office, MTS Towers
3, Amarapalli Circle, Vaishali Nagar,
Jaipur -302 021, Rajasthan. ……Opposite parties.
The complaint is coming upon before us finally on 23.10.2018 in the presence of M/s. S.Kannan, counsel for the complainant and Mr.R.Damodaran, counsel for the opposite parties and having perused the documents, evidences and written argument on both sides, this Forum delivered the following:-
ORDER
PRONOUNCED BY THIRU.R.BASKAR KUMARAVEL, MEMBER.
This complaint is filed by the complainant U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act-1986 against the opposite parties for seeking direction to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards compensation for causing mental agony, hardship and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and with cost Rs.40,000/- only.
2.The brief averments of the complaint are as follows:-
The complainant has availed the internet service connection with the opposite parties through data card MTS and was subscribed as MDN.No.8925268368, when the complainant was residing at his previous residence No.1/432A, Kamatchi Nagar, 2nd Street, Iyappanthangal, Chennai -600 056.
3. That due to some personal reasons, the complainant shifted his residence to the present complaint mentioned address and so he opted to disconnect the service rendered by the opposite parties and he requested the customer care service of the MTS to disconnect the service.
4. The complainant states that the authorized representative of the 1st opposite party came to the residence of the complainant and collected Rs.2500/- towards the bill due and issued a receipt for the same on 14.11.2016 bearing receipt No.295435 and told the complainant that the service has been disconnected.
5. That again on 15.11.2016, the complainant informed the customer care of MTS at 919150955955 about the payment and the disconnection of service. Further the complainant states that to the shock and surprise of the complainant on 16.11.2016 itself, one of the representatives of the opposite party called the complainant and asked him to pay Rs.151/- bill for one day service charge i.e. on 15.11.2016. The complainant refused to pay as the service has been disconnected on 14.11.2016 itself.
6. That from that day onwards on all subsequent days, the so called representatives and agents of the opposite parties, continuously called the complainant and his family member, threatened them with dire consequence, to pay some exorbitant amount as due, leaving the complainant in total mental agony and torture.
7. That, on 22.03.2017, the complainant received an SMS from the office of the opposite party, simply stating that Due to non-payment of Rs.2322/- for MTS No.892528368 case referred to Lok-Adalat , Allikulam Court Complex, Moore Market, Chennai -600 003 on 27.03.2017 Cont.9843607081.
8. The complainant caused a legal notice to the opposite parties through his counsel on 06.04.2017 calling upon the opposite parties to stop the torture and harassment, but till now the opposite parties does not even care to rectify their part or not even reply to the same. Hence this complaint.
The contention of written version of the opposite parties is briefly as follows:-
9. The complaint is devoid of merits and is not maintainable on facts or in law and is therefore liable to be dismissed in limine. All the averments and allegations made in the complaint are denied as false except to the extent admitted herein and the complainant is strict proof of the same. The complainant has suppressed material facts and there is no cause of action to the complainant as against this opposite parties and the complaint is a created one with ulterior motive to make unlawful gain. Further submits that the legal name of the opposite parties is Sistema Sysam Tele Services limited and the brand name is MTS which is not clearly mentioned in the cause-title of the complaint and gives an erroneous impression that the legal name of the opposite parties is MTS when it is not so.
10. The complainant paid billed and unbilled amount Rs.2500/- (14.11.2016) to the field executive of the opposite parties and informed to raise cancellation request. The field Executive collected the payment and informed the complainant that as per the process of the opposite parties, the complainant needed to call the customer contact centre of the opposite parties for cancellation of the service connection. When the complainant called the customer contact centre on 15.11.2016 regarding cancellation of his connection, the customer contact centre agent informed the complainant after checking the complainant’s account informed the complainant 4 days rental was due and needed to be paid by him in advance to in order to raise the cancellation request. This was as per the process of the opposite parties and in accordance with the detailed terms and conditions of the Customer Application Form (CAF) executed by the complainant at the time of availing the service from the opposite parties. Surprisingly, the complainant for reasons known to him refused to pay the unbilled amount of Rs.151/- that was due and payable him and unfortunately disconnected the call. As a result, the complainant’s request for disconnection could not be tagged in the system for the reason he had not complied with the process of making payment of the unbilled amount. Due to the connection being in ‘active’ status, bills got generated for the months of December 2016 and January 2017. As per the Tariff Enrolment form executed by the complainant at the time of subscribing to the services of the opposite parties, it is a monthly rental plan wherein the complainant was entitled to unlimited usage subject to fair usage/speed limit, unlike a prepaid plan where it was usage based and limited plan.
11. All dues as on the date of making a request for disconnection need to have been paid by the customer. So, when a customer speaks to the Customer Contact Centre and expresses his intention to disconnect the services, he is informed by the Customer Contact Centre that he/she has so and so balance rentals due and pending and that needed to be paid by him for enabling him to make a request for disconnection. NIL dues are a prerequisite for facilitating service disconnection. All mobile and Date operators are following this procedure. In case no dues are payable, then straightaway the customer’s connection is disconnected, else in the event of any dues payable, the customer contact centre informs the customer that a certain sum is payable being part of his tariff plan and basis his making the payment, his service disconnection request will be taken up. In the present instance, none of the above – mentioned formalities was complied with by the complainant.
12. Since, the complainant did not make payment of the unbilled amount of Rs.151/- and then make a request for disconnection with the Customer Contact Centre, the line continued to be active and as a result, the complainant was due and payable the following amounts towards monthly rentals:
From 16.11.2016 to 15.12.2017: Rs.1147/-
From 16.12.2016 to13.01.2017:Rs.1174.73/-(including Rs.100/- late fee)
It is not correct to allege that threats were being made to the complainant. Hence this complaint may be dismissed.
13. In order to prove the case, on the side of the complainant, the proof Affidavit submitted for his evidence and Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 were marked. While so on the side of the opposite parties proof Affidavit submitted for his evidence and Ex.B1 to Ex.B3 are marked on their side.
14. At this juncture, the point for consideration before this Forum is:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties as alleged in the complaint?
2. To what other reliefs, the complainant is entitled to?
15. Written arguments filed and oral argument also adduced on both sides.
Point.No.1:-
16. As per the averments of the complaint, the complainant was availed the interne service connection from the opposite parties through data card MTS MDN.No.8925268368, the complainant was residing at previous residence and due to the some personal reasons, the complainant shifted his residence to the present address as stated in the complaint, therefore he asked the opposite parties to disconnect the MTS service connection to his house, in turn a authorized representative of the 1st opposite party came to the residence of the complainant and collected Rs.2500/- towards the bill due and issued a receipt for the same on 14.11.2016 and the 1st opposite party authority informed the complainant that the connection has been disconnected. Again regarding the disconnection of service and payment of bill was informed by the complainant to the customer care service of MTS through mobile phone on 15.11.2016 itself.
17. Further, one of the representatives of the 1st opposite party on 16.11.2016 called to the complainant and asked him to pay Rs.151/- for one day bill i.e. for (15.11.2016) and the complainant was shocked and surprised after receiving this phone call. Then the complainant refused to pay, as the MTS service charge has been disconnected on 14.11.2016 itself. Therefore, one of the representatives and agents of the 1st opposite party continuously called to the complainant and his family members, threatened them with dire consequence, that to pay some exorbitant amount as due and caused severe mental agony and torture to the complainant and his family. Further, on 22.03.2017 the complainant received a SMS from the office of the 1st opposite party stating that Due to non-payment of Rs.2322/- for MTS No.892528368, the case has been referred to lok-Adalat, but the complainant has not received any summons or notice from the Lok-Adalat. Further the complainant pleads in his complaint that even after paying the entire charges to the opposite parties, the opposite parties were continuously given torture and mental agony to the complainant and his family members and thereby the complainant sent a legal notice to the opposite parties through his counsel called upon the opposite parties to stop the torture and harassment, but the malafide activities of the opposite parties continuous till now. Hence the complainant is not a defaulter and the demand of the opposite parties with the complainant as a deficiency of service against the complainant. Hence the complainant has filed this complaint before this Forum for remedy.
18. On the other hand, through written version of the opposite parties denied the allegations as alleged in the complaint by the complainant and in fact the complainant has suppressed material facts. Further the opposite parties pleads in his written version there is no cause of action to the complainant as against the opposite parties and the complaint is a created one with ulterior motive to make unlawful gain from the opposite parties. Since the complainant did not make payment of the unbilled amount of Rs.151/- as one day charge and they have not caused any mental tension and stress to the complainant and his family members. Hence this complaint may be dismissed.
19. At the outset, this Forum has to look into the matter as to whether the complainant has come forward to prove above said allegations against the opposite parties beyond any reasonable doubt by means of consistent and cogent evidence, which is primary duty of the complainant. In this regards, on careful perusal of the complainant evidence adduced by means of proof Affidavit, it is stated that the complainant has availed internet service connection MTS from the opposite parties, it is understood from the facts of the complainant case. The complainant was shifted his house from the old address to the present address and he requested with the opposite parties to disconnect the MTS internet service connection and on accepting the complainant request, one of the representatives of the opposite party came to the residence of the complainant and received the bill due amount of Rs.2500/- and for the same issued a receipt to the complainant, which is marked as Ex.A1. Further, in spite of the payment of charges and disconnection of the service was intimated to the customer care of the opposite parties through mobile phone on 15.11.2016 and after receiving this message one of the representatives of the opposite parties, called him to pay one day service charge that is for 15.11.2016 but the complainant was refused to pay the one day service charge, for the above both side allegations on each other as stated above no documentary evidence filed on either side. Further, there is no evidence produced by the opposite parties for the payment of Rs.151/- due by the complainant to the opposite parties. Moreover, the reason for refusal of payment of one day charge on 15.11.2016 to the opposite parties by the complainant on presumption of facts, it is legally sustainable because the service connection was disconnected on 14.11.2016 itself. Hence the complainant is not a defaulter. He need not pay Rs.151/- to the opposite parties.
20. An another issue of the complainant pleaded in his complaint taken into consideration that even after paying the internet service charges and disconnected the service connection of MTS the representatives and agents of the opposite parties continuously called the complainant and his family members, threatened to pay some exorbitant amount as due. But there is no evidence adduced on the side of the complainant to prove the above allegations as alleged in the complaint. Further, the complainant pleads that the opposite parties sent SMS to the complainant Due to non-payment of Rs.2322/- for internet service connection MTS No.8925258368 the opposite party has been filed a case before the LOK-ADALAT, it is posted for hearing before LOK-ADALAT on 27.03.2017 and the hard copy of the SMS marked as Ex.A5, but in this regard the complainant has not received any summons or notice from the LOK-ADALAT, therefore the complainant has not appeared before the LOK-ADALAT. Subsequently the complainant pleads in his complaint that the opposite parties were continuously rendering the trouble to the complainant, which is caused severe hardships, mental agony to the complainant and his family. Because of continuous malafide activities of the opposite parties the complainant issued a legal notice on 06.04.2017 through his counsel, which is marked as Ex.A2 and the postal receipt is marked as Ex.A3. The complainant called upon the opposite parties to stop the torture and harassment rendering to him and his family members through his legal notice, but till now the opposite parties does not even reply to the same and they are continuous with their activities of threatening the complainant.
21. On the other hand, the opposite parties filed their proof affidavit along with documentary evidences against the complainant and filed the post paid customer Application Form which is marked as Ex.B1 and election commission of India issued identity card to the complainant marked as Ex.B2 and Tariff Enrollment Form – post paid Mblaze is marked as Ex.B3. Further it is seen from the Ex.B1 clearly shows that the complainant and the opposite parties have entered into contract for providing MTS service connection to the complainant by the opposite parties. Moreover, the Tariff Enrollment Form-Post Paid Mblaze stipulated in its terms and conditions, it is agreed by the both parties, which is marked as Ex.B3.
22. While going through the facts and circumstances of the both parties and scrupulously analyzing the documentary evidences adduced on either side and the relief prayed by the complainant before this Forum, the complainant is not a defaulter, in paying service charges to the opposite parties. Moreover it clearly reveals that as requested by the complainant only the opposite parties disconnected the service connection. So the opposite parties have rendered their service as per the contract and infact the complainant has not pleaded anywhere in his pleading that the opposite parties have committed deficiency of service against him. The only allegation made by the complainant against the opposite parties reiteratively in his complaint that opposite parties threatened him to pay the due for service connection but he has not paid any extra amount as demanded by the opposite parties. Further, the complainant has been pleaded in his complaint that the opposite parties called upon him to appear before LOK-ADALAT and settled the due amount by sending SMS message, but the complainant has not appeared and paid any amount as demanded by the opposite parties before LOK-ADALAT. Regarding this issue the opposite parties has not taken any further steps against the complainant to recover the amount by adopting any unlawful means. Further, it is crystal clear that the entire facts and circumstances of the complainant case against the opposite parties though the complainant is a Consumer as per Section 2 (1) (d) of Consumer Protection Act -1986, because the case of the complainant as per the facts pleaded in the complaint shows that only contiguous threat to the complainant and his family members by some representatives of opposite parties which lime lights the complainant case before this Forum as purely a case of criminal nature. Therefore this Forum came to conclusion that the complainant case does not reveals any prima facie and cause of action against the opposite parties have committed any deficiency of service against the complainant as per Section 2(o) Consumer Protection Act – 1986. Therefore, the complainant has failed to prove his case beyond the reasonable doubt against the opposite parties. Thus the point No.1 is answered accordingly.
Point No.2:-
23. As per the conclusion arrived in point No.1, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed in the complaint. Thus the point No.2 is answered accordingly.
In the Result, this Complaint is Dismissed. No Cost.
Dictated by the member to the steno-typist, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the member and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this 02nd November 2018.
-Sd- -Sd-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
List of document filed by the complainant:-
Ex.A1 | 14.11.2016 | Provisional Receipt | Xerox |
Ex.A2 | 06.04.2017 | Legal notice to the 2nd opposite party | Xerox |
Ex.A3 | 11.01.2017 | Postal receipt | original |
Ex.A4 | ……… | Acknowledgement card | original |
Ex.A5 | ………. | Hard copy of the SMS | Xerox |
List of document filed by the opposite parties:-
Ex.B1 | | Post paid customer application form | Xerox |
Ex.B2 | | Proof of identity | Xerox |
Ex.B3 | | Post paid tariff enrollment form | Xerox |
-Sd- -Sd-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
