Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/484/2015

Mandeep Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Vodafone Private Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Amitabh Suri

30 Mar 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

 

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/484/2015
Date of Institution	:	30/07/2015
Date of Decision	:	30/03/2016

 

Mandeep Sharma s/o Jagan Nath Sharma Vill. Trivedi Camp Tehsil Derabassi District Mohali (Pb.).

…..Complainant

V E R S U S

1.     Vodafone Private Ltd., C-131, Industrial Area, Phase VIII Mohali through its Managing Directors/Partners/ Chief Executive Officer/Managing Director

2.     Vodafone Store SCO 487-488, Ground Floor, Sector
35-C, Chandigarh through its Manager, Branch Head.

……Opposite Parties

 

 

QUORUM:	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	PRESIDING MEMBER
	MRS. PRITI MALHOTRA	MEMBER

               

                                                                       

For complainant	:	Sh. Dhawal Bhandari, Advocate
For OPs	:	Ms. Parminder Kaur, Advocate

                                         

 

PER SURJEET KAUR, PRESIDING MEMBER

1.         Sh. Mandeep Sharma, complainant has filed this consumer complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against Vodafone Private Ltd. and another, Opposite Parties (hereinafter called the OPs), alleging that he contacted the OPs for changing his mobile No.9780233789 from postpaid to prepaid. As instructed by the executive of the Vodfone store, the complainant deposited the bill till 26.2.2015 and in fact an amount of Rs.171/- was wrongly paid in excess which was not refunded to him.  However, when the connection was not changed to prepaid, the complainant approached OP-2 on 4.3.2015 where he was requested to submit the documents and photograph and to fill the form again as the previous documents had been lost. Despite doing the needful, the prepaid sim of the complainant was not activated.  The complainant came to know that due to not clearing the bill and dues, his prepaid sim was not activated whereas he had already paid an amount of Rs.171/- in excess.  Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.
2.         In their written reply, OPs have not disputed the factual matrix of the case.  It has been averred that as per the procedure, the complainant was asked to clear his outstanding bills and dues in order to switch to prepaid. It has been stated that as the documents of the complainant were lost, he was called upon to again submit the documents, but he refused to do so due to which the number could not be activated.  It has been denied that the complainant had to face any misery or losses on account of any act on the part of the OPs.  Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part, OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3.         In his replication, the complainant has controverted the stand of the OPs and reiterated his own.
4.         The parties led evidence in support of their contentions. 
5.         We have gone through the record, including the written arguments, and heard the arguments addressed by the learned Counsel for the complainant.
6.         The case of the complainant is that he applied with the OPs for conversion of his post-paid mobile connection into pre-paid one and cleared all his dues, but, the OPs lost the documents submitted by him for the aforesaid purpose and, therefore, they have not activated the pre-paid services till date.  It has also been alleged that while paying the dues, the complainant wrongly paid Rs.171/- in excess which also have not been refunded by the OPs. 
7.         The stand taken by the OPs is that it is fault on the part of the complainant only who did not submit the required documents once again for the purpose of conversion of the post-paid connection to the pre-paid one once the same were lost by them (OPs). It has been further contended that this fact was brought to the knowledge of the complainant repeatedly. 
8.         It is an admitted fact that the OPs could not convert the post-paid connection of the complainant to
   pre-paid one as they themselves lost the documents submitted by him for the purpose of aforesaid conversion. As per the case of the complainant, the required documents were again submitted by him alongwith his photograph for the activation of the pre-paid services. It is clear from Annexure P-1 and P-2 that the complainant cleared his dues and applied for conversion from post-paid to pre-paid, but, due to loss of documents from the custody of the OPs, the connection has not been activated till date. So far as the question of non-submission of requisite documents by the complainant second time even after various requests, OPs have failed to place on record any communication e.g. email/SMS sent by them in this regard to the complainant.  Hence, the failure of the OPs in converting the post-paid connection of the complainant into a pre-paid one even after getting all the formalities completed points out towards deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part.  So far as the contention of the complainant with regard to paying Rs.171/- in excess to the OPs is concerned, neither he has produced any cogent and authentic evidence in support of the same nor he has prayed for refund of the same in the prayer clause of his complaint, hence the same cannot be granted to him. 
9.         In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the present complaint deserves to succeed. The same is accordingly partly allowed. The OPs are directed as under :-

(i)     To immediately convert the connection of the complainant from post-paid to pre-paid and resume the services;

(ii)    To pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant;

(iii)   To pay Rs.5,000/- as costs of litigation. 

10.         This order be complied with by the OPs within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which they shall make the payment of the amount mentioned at Sr.No.(ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint till realization, apart from compliance of directions at Sr.No.(i) & (iii) above.
11.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-
30/03/2016	[Priti Malhotra]	[Surjeet Kaur]
hg	Member	Presiding Member