Order-12.
Date-22/07/2016.
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
The case of the complainant, in short, is that he has been using Vodafone Mobile connection herein No.9239444454 for the last 6 years. Some of the numbers which the complainant is using are old as 11 years. At all material times since availing of the aforesaid post paid connection the complainant has been using the same and has made payments of the bills raised by Vodafone East Ltd. The complainant on or about 25-11-2015 had contacted the Customer Care Department of the company and made a request for obtaining details of his incoming call records from 01-01-2015 till date. The complainant was intimated that is request for obtaining the incoming call details cannot be entertained in as much as the rules of the company does not allow the company to furnish the incoming call details to its times. The complainant thereafter, issued a legal notice dated 13-01-2016. The complainant was asked in reply to contact 9830410285 for redressal of his remedies. The complainant with hope again pursued the matter but again he was disappointed. Hence, this case.
The OPs Vodafone East Ltd. filed written version and subsequently failed to contest the case. The case is heard ex parte. On the date of hearing argument OP, however, filed a petition for vacating the order for ex parte hearing and the argument is heard ex parte.
Point for Decision
- Whether the OP is guilty of deficiency of service?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons
We have travelled over the documents filed from the side of the complainant. The complainant as it appears holds a post paid connection under the OP Company. The complainant has been using the post paid connection and is making regular bills. The dispute arises over refusal to provide the details of his incoming call records from 01-01-2015 till date. We find that the complainant has not made out any specific case why he requires the incoming call details for the period therein mentioned in the petition of complaint. We find that OPs are charging bills or raising bills for the outgoing calls for the said connection. It is no where appearing from the bills as annexed with the petition of complaint that the OPs are charging bills for record of incoming calls. Moreover, the complainant has failed to cite any rule before us that the OPs are under the rule obligatory to furnish incoming details to his clients. The incoming call details are such numbers, phone calls which are already received by the complainant while using the connection. The complainant is aware of the said calls having received the same on diverse days while using the mobile services. If the complainant has not saved or stored the said numbers the problem lies with the complainant. We think that the complainant in no manner can seek from the OPs to furnish details of the calls record of third parties or other subscribers. Such information or details of incoming call details may be detrimental or breaches of confidentiality of other third party customers. We think that not providing such information is not at all deficiency of service, as such, service was never assured to the complainant and no bill is also raised for that purpose.
In the result, the case fails.
Hence,
Ordered
That the instant case be and the same is dismissed ex parte but on merit against the OP without any cost.
