RELIANCE INDIA MOBILE LTD Vs. HARI CHAND GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved and dissatisfied by the Judgment and Order dated 13.12.2005 passed in Appeal No. 155 of 2005 by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory, Chandigarh, Petitioner - M/s. Reliance India Mobile Ltd., has preferred this Revision Petition.

(2.) THE State Commission confirmed the order dated 29.7.2005 passed by the District Forum-II, Chandigarh, in Consumer Complaint No.1057 of 2004, and imposed Rs.50,000/- as punitive damages with costs quantified at Rs.5,000/-. Further, the District Forum vide its order dated 29.7.2005 passed in Complaint No. 1057 of 2004, directed the Petitioner to shift the mobile telephone of the Complainant from Chandigarh to Kurukshetra region and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for deficiency in service and costs of Rs.2,500/-. In default, the Petitioner was also to pay interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the awarded amount.Against the order of the State Commission, the Petitioner has filed this Revision Petition before this Commission. However, the State Commission further ordered for initiation of criminal proceedings against the Petitioner, particularly, its authorised signatory, Shri Padamjit Singh, on the ground that he has filed a false reply and affidavit. For that purpose, the State Commission has ordered inquiry to be made by the District Forum under Section 340 of Cr.P.C. read with Sections 195 Cr.P.C. for the offences alleged to have been committed under Section 191, 192, 193 I.P.C., and to take action against the authorised signatory, if found guilty.

(3.) THESE proceedings arose from the complaint filed by the Respondent contending that he is a resident of Kurukshetra Nursing Home, Pipli Road, Kurukshetra, Haryana. On 8.3.2003, he had applied for obtaining a connection of Reliance India Mobile Phone as a member of Dhirubhai Ambani Pioneer Club, by paying full amount of Rs.21,000/- by Cheque drawn on Punjab State Cooperative Bank, Chandigarh. As per the scheme, the Complainant was to receive cell phone through courier at his Chandigarh address. It is his contention that the Complainant was required to shift his residence from Chandigarh to Kurukshetra for health reasons. For this purpose, he visited the office of the Petitioner at Chandigarh and filled up the form meant for shifting of mobile phone to his new Kurukshetra address. For this purpose, he has also sent an e-mail on 8.5.2003 giving intimation of change of address from Chandigarh to Kurukshetra. By letter dated 10.4.2003 the Petitioner intimated the Complainant that they had extended the period of free usage of mobile phone upto 30.4.2003. However, the Complainant received a bill dated 1.5.2003 at his Chandigarh address for the period from 1.4.2003 to 30.4.2003, for a sum of Rs.224/-.