DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION (EAST)
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,
SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092
C.C. No. 826/2015
| RAJBIR SINGH R/O 165, 1ST FLOOR, SECTOR-37, FARIDABAD, HARYANA | ….Complainant |
Versus |
| 1-VODAFONE MOBILE C-48, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-II, NEW DELHI - 110020 | ……OP |
Date of Institution | : | 23.10.2015 |
Judgment Reserved on | : | 14.03.2023 |
Judgment Passed on | : | 09.05.2023 |
QUORUM:
Sh. S.S. Malhotra | (President) |
Ms. Rashmi Bansal | (Member) |
Sh. Ravi Kumar | (Member) |
Order By: Shri S.S. Malhotra (President)
JUDGMENT
- By this order the Commission shall dispose off the present complaint filed by the Complainant against OP w.r.t. deficiency IN service in overcharging the bill.
- Brief facts as stated by the complainant in the complainant are that complainant is the user of Postpaid Vodafone Number 9911522745 since last two years and on account of some official reason he stayed in Italy from 14.12.2014 to 10.03.2015 and kept his Vodafone number i.e. 9911522745 with family in India and most of time complainant used to get missed call from his Indian Mobile number i.e. 9911522745 to his Italian number i.e. +393240723146 and after getting the missed call the complainant used to get call back through his Indian number but despite that complainant received a bill of Rs.20/- per miss call and then he approached the OP to correct his bill which was not done. The Complaint of the complainant did not receive any response from the OP and ultimately he filed the present complainant thereby claiming a compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- towards mental harassment and also to illegally disconnecting his connection and litigation expenses of Rs.15,000/-.
- OP has filed Written Statement taking preliminary objection that complaint filed by complainant is not maintainable as there is no deficiency in the service of the OP, the complaint can only be adjudicated in Civil Court, in view of the Arbitration Clause this Commission does not have any jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint, complaint is bad for mis-joinder of parties, there is no deficiency in the service of the OP, complainant has not come to Commission with clean hands and it is further submitted that on the basis of the information furnished in the application the telephone number was issued to him and this number has to be used with certain conditions which the complainant has to follow and this Commission does not have any territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.
- On merit the issuing of number is not denied and it is submitted that complainant has been billed for usages originating on his Sim Card and registered by the OP and further it is not the case of the complainant that the calls have not been originated from his connection. The Complainant has been billed at tariff rates and complainant is also not disputing the said rates and it is further submitted that complainant has never been charged for missed calls as alleged but has been charged for ISD calls of upto one minute duration as per the bill and therefore there is not cause of action and it is prayed that complaint of the complainant be dismissed.
- Complainant has filed Rejoinder and denying the contents of the Written Statement and reiterating the contents of the complaint.
- The Complainant as well as OP both have filed their respective evidences.
- The Commission has heard the arguments and perused the records.
- Before coming to the merits of the case one fact has to be observed i.e. with respect to jurisdiction of the complaint. The Complainant is a resident of Sector-37, Faridabad, Haryana and the address of the OP is stated to be Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi. Neither the cause of action has been stated to have arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission nor any of the party resides within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission.
- Before adverting to the merits, as to whether there was any deficiency w.r.t. services assured to be given by the OP to the Complainant or w.r.t. the fact that the Bill against the Mobile Number of the Complainant has been excessively done, first issue w.r.t. jurisdiction has to be entertained which is germane to the proceedings as if this Commission does not have the jurisdiction, it cannot touch the merits of the case.
- Section 34 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which reads as under:
Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the District Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration does not exceed one crore rupees:
Provided that where the Central Government deems it necessary so to do, it may prescribe such other value, as it deems fit.
(2) A complaint shall be instituted in a District Commission within the local limits of whose jurisdiction-
(a) the opposite parry or each of the opposite parties, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, ordinarily resides or carries on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain, or
(b) any of the opposite parties, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides, provided that in such case the permission of the District Commission is given; or
(c) the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises, or
(d) the complainant resides or personally works for gain.
(3) The District Commission shall ordinarily function in the district headquarters and may perform its functions at such other place in the district, as the State Government may, in consultation with the State Commission, notify in the Official Gazette from time to time.
- The Complainant is a resident of Sector-37, Faridabad, Haryana and the address of the OP is stated to be Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi. Neither the cause of action has been stated to have arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission nor any of the party resides within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission.
- Accordingly, this Commission is of the opinion that this Commission does not have any territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint, complaint is therefore ordered to be returned to the Complainant. All the Misc. Application pending if any are also dismissed and interim Order if any is vacated.
Copy of the order be supplied / sent to the parties free of cost as per rules.
File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced on 09.05.2023