RELIANCE COMMUNICATION LTD Vs. PRASANNA KUMAR MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal, at the instance of all the opposite parties in C.D. Case No. 04 of 2006, has been directed against the order dated 21.3.2007 of the District Forum, Cuttack directing them to pay compensation of Rupees 1 lakh to the complainant/respondent for mental agony and hardship for causing him deficiency in service in respect to mobile Telecom Service and also directing them to return to the complainant/respondent the amount taken on the head club membership charges.

(2.) IT is worthwhile to mention that only opposite party Nos. l and 4 had filed written version and had contested the C.D. case. This appeal has been filed by Reliance Communication Ltd. on behalf of all the opposite parties while stating that Reliance Infocom Ltd. and Reliance Industries Ltd. against which the impugned order has been passed and which had provided Telecom services to the complainant, has meanwhile, been demerged and renamed as Reliance Communication Ltd., the appellant and the present appellant has taken care of the interest of all the opposite parties of the C.D. case.

(3.) FACTS as per the complaint petition in brief is that being persuaded by the agent of Reliance Infocom Ltd. assuring best service, complainant deposited Rupees 3,000 and 12 post -dated cheques each amounting to Rupees 1,800 with three months gap covering for a period of 36 months towards rent with the Reliance Infocom Ltd., hereinafter be called as opposite party's company for infocom mobile phone. Accordingly, in the month of April, 2003, Company provided him Mobile handset of Samsung make with connection No. 671 -3100602. In the month of January, 2004, getting offer of up -gradation from black and while set to coloured set from the Company, complainant deposited Rupees 1,401with Web Word opposite party No. 4. The black and white Samsung set was taken back by the Company and a coloured handset was supplied to the complainant of L.G. make (Model No. RD7/30) with same telephone number. Complainant has never defaulted payment of bills. The opposite parties were also getting cleared the post -dated cheques regularly. But after upgradation, there was regular disturbance and incoming calls were not being properly received and incoming calls most of the times were lost within 15 to 20 seconds. When complainant complained about this to Customer Care Chief, Cuttack, it only advised to complain and approach the L.G. Service Centre. In spite of approach to L.G. Service Centre, which also rendered service, same defect continued. So, complainant discontinued payment of bills with intimation to opposite party No. 4. Since opposite party No. 4 thereafter restricted outgoing calls for non -payment of outstanding bill amounting to Rupees 1,334.28 paise, he cleared up the same on the advice of Web Word (opposite party No. 4) assuring him to restore outgoing calls and to rectify the defect by deputing Service Engineer. But, outgoing calls were not restored and no Service Engineer attended the telephone. Therefore, complainant issued notice (xerox copy Annexure -3) to opposite party Nos. l and 2 to restore outgoing calls within three days, failing which he would instruct the Bank for stopping payment in respect to uncleared post -dated cheques. But, no action was taken till 14.8.2004. Complainant issued instruction to Bank for stop payment with intimation to opposite party No. 4. Of course opposite party No. 4 refused to receive such intimation sent by registered post. Complainant issued notice to the opposite parties for refund of all the deposits and cheque amount cleared from the Bank. But, Web World refused to accept the notice (xerox copy Annexure 5). On 16.8.2004 he received letter dated 16.8.2004 (Annexure -6) from Reliance Infocom assuring him to provide service through Customer Care, Orissa (opposite party No. 3). Though outstanding calls were restored for 13 days w.e.f. 4.9.2004, it was again taken away on 17.9.2004 and opposite parties did not attend the complaint in view of letter dated 16.8.2004. He sent notice dated 11.11.2004 (Annexure -7) to the opposite parties claiming compensation towards physical and mental agony as being an advocate has suffered huge loss being unable to contact and being contacted by clients. As opposite parties failed to do the needful alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, complainant filed the C.D. case claiming Rupees 1,07,401against the opposite parties.