DATE OF FILING                    :  16.12.2015.

DATE OF S/R                            :   03.02.2016.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :  03.03.2017.  

MR BIPLAB MAYUR,

Son of Sushil Mayur,

Residing at 81/1/c/1, Tantipara Lane,

P.O Santragachi, P.S  Shibpur,

District  Howrah,

PIN 711 104. ….…………………………………………….. COMPLAINANT.

• Versus   -

1. The Manager,

M/S Vodafone South Limited,

11, Dr. U.N. Brahmachari Street,

 P.S. Park Street,

Kolkata 700017

2. The Executive Manager,

M/S. Vodafone East Ltd (VODAFONE STORE).

5 P Mahatma Ghandi Road, P.S. Howrah,

Howrah 711 101.

3. Mr. Jaydeb Manna

C/O Manomita Saloon,

Sujata Building Howrah Amta Road, P.S. Dasnagar,

Howrah 711 105

4. The Nodal Officer,

Vodafone South Ltd.,

DLF IT Park, Block- AF, 15th Floor,

08 Major Arterial Road, New Town, Rajarhat,

Kol 700156,………………….……………………..OPPOSITE PARTIES.

P    R    E     S    E    N     T

Hon’ble President  :   Shri  B. D.  Nanda,  M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.

Hon’ble Member      :      Smt. Jhumki Saha.

Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak.

F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1. Complainant, Mr. Biplab Mayur,  by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C .P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.p.s to give a recharge of 10GB 3G Data for which he already paid an amount of Rs. 851/-,  to pay Rs. 50,000/- as  compensation and Rs. 20,000/- as litigation cost  along  with other relief or reliefs as the  Forum may deem fit and proper. 
2.  Brief fact of the case is that complainant got an offer of recharging with Rs. 851 for getting 10GB, 3G Data on 21/09/2015 in place of 5GB,3G Data from O.P. nos 1,2 and 4. Accordingly, he paid Rs. 851/- to O.P.no3 against the Transaction ID KO 1595868162. But after recharging , complainant got only 5GB , 3G Data instead of 10 GB, 3G Data.  Immediately he contacted with the  O.P. nos 1,2 and 4 and he was assured by them that it would be adjusted very shortly. But it was not done. So, he lodged one complainant being no. 1791432034. Even then he did not get any fruitful result. So, he sent one legal notice dt. 28/10/2015.  But no fruitful result came out.  So, alleging deficiency in service coupled with unfair trade practice , complainant filed this instant case with the aforesaid prayers.
3. Notices were served. The O.P.s appeared and filed w/v . Accordingly, case was heard on contest against all the O.P. s
4. Two points arose for determination :

i)   Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P..  ?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?

5. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the petition of complaint and its annexures, w/v of O.P. and noted their  contents. It is the specific plea of O.P. nos 1,2 and 4 that  there was no such double data offer  i.e inplace of 5GB , complainant would get 10GB data with respect to the said transaction ID against which the said recharge  of Rs.851/- was done through O.P. no 3.  They have also given the detail of various data plan in para 14 of their w/v.  Moreover, complainant paid Rs. 851/- on 21.09.2015 and next recharge he did on 18/10/2016. But the validity period was 28 days for the first one . It is also stated by them that his balance data would have been carried forward if the next recharge had been done within 28 days but he did on 18/10/2016. Here we take a pause. Complainant had recharged exactly on 28^th day which is within the validity period of the first one i.e recharge of Rs. 851/-. This is also our common experience that sometimes at the time of particular recharge, O.P. nos 1,2 and 4 give some extra benefit and which also varies from customer to customer. Here, in this case, O.P.no3 , the retailer appeared before this Forum personally and submitted that at the time of recharging with Rs. 851/-, complainant’s  number got such an offer.  But later on, after recharging, complainant did not get 10GB data inplace of 5GB. Actually, we being the common people believe the retailer and on his assurance , we buy the data plan . Now, the retailer gives such assurance after confirming the offers available for a particular number at a particular time of recharge. Accordingly, O.P.nos 1,2 and 4 are found to be deficient in service for which we have nothing but to hold O.P.nos 1, 2 and 4 liable and responsible. Accordingly, the petition of complainant succeeds. Points under consideration are accordingly decided.

      Hence,

                                                         O     R     D      E      R      E        D

           That the C. C. Case No. 428 of 2015 ( HDF 428 of 2015 )  be  allowed on contest against O.P.nos 1, 2 and 4 with costs and dismissed against O.P.no 3 without costs.

        That the O.P.s 1,2 and 4 are directed to credit 5GB DATA 3G  to the complainant’s number within 30 days from this order i.d Rs. 50/- per day shall be imposed on them till actual credit.

         That the O.P.s are further directed to pay Rs. 2000/- as compensation and Rs. 1,000/- as litigation cost which they must pay within 30 days from this order i.d the entire amount of Rs. 3,000/- shall carry an interest @ 8% p.a till actual payment.

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

      (  Jhumki Saha  )                                                                  

  Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah.