Order-16.
Date-26/04/2017.
Shri Kamal De, President.
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
Complainant’s case in short, is that Complainant is a customer of OP- telecom service as well as internet network service since a long time and is enjoying service of post-paid connection without any interruption and problem in the phone no. being 9748747044 holding relationship no. 154913046. The Complainant is a Chartered Accountant by profession and is a busy person who has to move on to various places for his business purpose. On 1st June, 2016 the Complainant had to go abroad and he availed an International Roaming Pack in his Vodafone No. which duly activated as per his request. As per the plan the OP promised to provide.
Free talk time | 10000 Minutes (home and roam local + STD |
Free SMS | 1000 SMS (local + STD) |
Free Internet USG . | 8GB |
The Complainant activated the International roaming plan as he was away from his home land and especially on business trip. The said International roaming was activated on 1st June,2016 but the said data pack was deactivated without prior intimation or giving any opportunity to address the issue within 3 hours from the date of this activation and for this 3 hours OP generated a bill amounting to Rs.31,538.64. From 3rd June,2016 all the services including incoming as well as outgoing facilities were also stopped. The Complainant as such had to return back without completing his business purpose and he faced huge financial loss. The Complainant also mailed the concerned OP about such fake and frivolous bill and also wanted to know about deactivation of the incoming and outgoing facilities in his phone no. The Complainant however, finding no other alternative paid the bill to re-connect the connection for sake of essential part of the business. The Complainant has alleged deficiency of service and unfair trade practice against the OP and Complainant prayed for refund of the amount of Rs.31,538.64 along with other reliefs. Hence this case.
OPs have contested the case in filing w.v. contending inter alia that the case is not maintainable in fact and in law.
It is stated that Complainant has admitted that the data usage charge and international calling charge was generated as per the usage. The Complainant has not disclosed any details in his complaint about the ‘Special International Roaming Pack’ he chose to activate while he was going to abroad. He also stated that the Complainant made use of data usage continuously giving rise to a bill of around 31,538.65. It is also stated that no Special International Roaming Pack activated on the Complainant’s No. The Red4Business 1599 plan offers only domestic facility and no facility whatsoever relating to International Roaming is part of the pack. It is also stated that the Complainant’s service was deactivated after his dynamic credit limit had been crossed. It is stated that as the bill which was generated due to International calling and that for huge usage, there wasno option to the service provider to disconnect the service temporarily. This OP has stated that the complaint being frivolous and vexatious is liable to be dismissed.
Point for Decision
1) Whether OPs have been deficient in rendering service to the Complainant?
2) Whether the OPs have indulged in unfair trade practice?
2) Whether the Complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons
We have perused the document on record i.e. photocopy of Vodafone bill dated 15.06.2016, photocopy of legal notice dated 26.08.2016 as filed by the Complainant.
We have also perused the document filed from the side of the OP i.e. photocopy of the letter dated 30the August , 2016 addressed to the Complainant by Vodafone Mobile Service Ltd., photocopy of Bills dated 15.06.2016 – bill period 15.05.2016 to 14.06.2016, photocopy of usage details for the period 15.05.2016 – 14.06. 2016, photocopy of item-wise calls by the Complainant ‘s bill period 15.05.2016 – 14.06.2016 regarding mobile internet charges, including National Roaming outgoing calls, International Roaming incoming calls and outgoing calls , mobile internet break-up, mobile internet charges and other documents on record.
It appears that the Complainant has merely activated the facilities of International Roaming on his mobile number. Said facility means the subscriber’s no. would be active while on International Roaming while being charged at standard pay go rates for International Roaming and this facility does not offer any discounted special pack benefits. It also appears that the Complainant was in Nepal when the high data usage charge and International Calling Charge was generated as per usage. The Complainant has not also disclosed any details about the special International Roaming Pack he chose to activate while he was going to abroad. It however appears from the bills that he visited Nepal. It appears that the Complainant used International calling and data in a foreign land and as the data charges in foreign country is very high, the data service was discontinued after continuous data usage by the Complainant which gave rise to a bill of Rs.31,538.64. There is nothing on record that subject International Roaming Pack was activated on the Complainant’s no. We also find that the Red4Business 1599 plan offers only the domestic facility and not facility whatsoever relating to International Roaming is part of the pack. We also find that the plan for the Complainant was Red4Business 1599, wherein mobile service are provided to business personnel for their use. So, it is apparent that the Complainant has taken the connection for commercial purpose.
It is also apparent that Free 8 GB data usage is available within National boundaries and the usage made while International Roaming is chargeable at standard International pay-go-rates. We also find that the Complainant has failed to provide any documentary evidence whatsoever of activating any International Roaming Pack on his mobile no. Complainant has also failed to disclose the facilities he is alleging to have been offered by the said alleged Roaming Pack.From the item-wise calls as have been found from the side of the OP, it appears that the Complainant while on International Roaming had used data for various purposes and such usage of data while on International Roaming have caused proportionate bills. Moreover, Complainant had not disclosed of the original business he had gone for, or which abroad country he visited or what business he had missed for disconnection of his mobile connection. The Complainant has not also activated the relevant subject packs for International Roaming calls and data for Nepal.
We find from the bills on record of the data usage charge was charged by the service provider in foreign land and the said charge thereafter was paid by the Complainant incorporated in the bill raised by the OPs. Moreover, the Complainant has not denied using data service at any point of time in the petition of complaint. The Complainant has also failed to specify for what reason the compensation is asked for. Moreover, we find that the Complainant has paid the bill to reconnect connection and connection is also restored. We do not find any deficiency of service on the part of the OPs.
In result, the case merits no success.
Hence,
Ordered
That the instant case be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OPs.
No order as to cost.
