IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Wednesday the 31st day of May, 2017
Filed on 23.. 09..2016
Present
1. Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2. Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3. Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.307/2016
Between
Complainant:- Opposite party:-
Sri. Raneesh .T.R Phonolab Cable Work
Thuruthikad, Muhamma.P.O Muhamma
Alappuzha – 688 525 Alappuzha – 688 525
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The case of the complainant in short is as follows:-
The father of the complainant is a consumer of the opposite party and availed 2 cable connections from the opposite party and paid a total amount of Rs. 5000/- to the opposite party as the cost of the set- top boxes. Due to some billing disputes the connections were disconnected in the month of April. The complainant requested the opposite party to refund the amount Rs.5000/- which was paid towards the price of the set top box. But the opposite party has not refund the amount thereafter the complainant failed a petition before the Muhamma Police Station. The opposite party stated that there is a provision to change an amount of Rs.2. 00/- per day as the rent of the set top box and after deducting
such amount the balance amount of Rs. 1500/- was paid to the complainant and complainant returned the two set-top boxes to the opposite party. Since the opposite party has not returned the entire amount collected. The complainant sustained much mental agony and hence filed this complaint.
2. Notice was served to the opposite party. Opposite party appeared before the Forum and filed version.
3. Version of the opposite party is as follows:-
The complainant is not a consumer of the opposite party. The complaint is not maintainable. The opposite party has provided 2 connections to Mr. Retnakaran. The opposite party has not charged any amount for the set top box. The opposite party has charged Rs.1450/- only for one set top box including activation charge and service charge. Since the consumer was not remitted 2 monthly installments after giving proper notice the opposite party has disconnected the connection. The case was once settled before the Muhamma Police Station and the complainant has no local standi to file this complaint. The opposite party is charging only Rs. 225/- from the consumer for two connections instead of Rs.300/-. Since the consumer has defaulted in remitting the monthly payments the opposite party after giving proper notice disconnected the services and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence the complaint may be dismissed with cost of the opposite party.
4. The complainant was examined as PW1 and the documents produced were marked as Ext.A1and Ext.A2. The opposite party was examined as RW1 and documents Ext.B1 to Ext.B6 were marked.
4.Considering the allegations of the complainant and contentions of the opposite party the Forum has raised the following issues:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief ?
5. Issues 1 and 2 :-
The case of the complainant is that his father is a consumer of the opposite party and availed 2 cable connections and bought two set top boxes from the opposite party after remitting Rs. 5000/- while so in the month of April 2016 the opposite party has discounted the connection without giving proper notice due to some billing dispute. The complainant demanded the opposite party to refund Rs. 5000/- which was paid towards the cost of the set top box, but the opposite party had returned Rs.1500/- only. Hence filed this complaint.
The complainant produced 2 documents which were marked as Ext.A1 and Ext.A2. Ext.A1 is the copy of hand book is FAQS on Board casting and cable TV services by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI). Ext.A2 is the bill dated 01/03/2016. Opposite party was examined as RW1 and documents Exts B1 to Ext.B6 were marked. Ext.B1 is the Delivery note. Ext.B2 is the copy of disconnection notice. Ext. B3 is the bill. Ext.B4 is the printed notice. Ext.B5 is the computer generated copy Kerala vision showing rates of set top boxes. Ext.B6 is the copy of the standard of quality of Service and Consumer Protection Regulations 2016.
According to the complainant he as paid an amount of Rs. 5000/- towards the cost of two set top boxes. But according to the opposite party he has charged only Rs. 2990/-. Admittedly the matter was once settled before the police station and the opposite party after deducting Rs.2 per each day as rent of the set top box and the balance amount of Rs. 1500/- has been returned to the complainant and he received the same without any objection so we are not looking into that aspect. The only question come up for consideration in order to find deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party is that whether the opposite party has served proper notice to the consumer before disconnecting the cable connection. As per TRAI’s rules in case of disconnection of services the consumer will have to be given a 15 day notice. Ext.B2 is the copy of disconnection notice issued to the consumer. From this we can’t see that the same was served to the consumer. Further when the PW1 was examined he deposed that no disconnection notice was served to the consumer before disconnecting the cable service. The documents produced by the opposite party would not show that disconnection notice was served to the consumer. Hence we are of the opinion that the opposite party has committed deficiency in service and he is liable to compensate the complainant for the mental agony and inconvenience caused to the complainant. So the complaint allowed partly.
In the result the complaint allowed partly. The opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.2000/- towards the compensation No order as to costs. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of the receipt of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of May, 2017.
Sd/-Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member)
Sd/-Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
Sd/-Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Raneesh
Ext.A1 - Copy of Hand Book
Ext.A2 - Bill dated 1/3/2016
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
RW1 - Lalu.K
Ext.B1 - Delivery note dated 23/12/2016
Ext.B2 - Copy of Demand &disconnection notice.
Ext.B3 - Due Bill dated 1-4-2016
Ext.B4 - Public notice
Ext.B5 - Computer generated Web site notice copy
Ext.B6 - Copy of the Standard of quality of Service & Consumer Protection
Regulation 2016 .
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
