First Appeal No. CA/03/2005. Case: Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs Saumitra Nath. Meghalaya State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
| Case Number | First Appeal No. CA/03/2005 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: S.C. Shyam, Advocate and For Respondents: S. Deka, Advocate |
| Judges | P.K. Musahary, J. (President) and Ramesh Bawri, Sr. Member |
| Issue | Consumer Law |
| Citation | III (2014) CPJ 36 (Megha.) |
| Judgement Date | June 20, 2014 |
| Court | Meghalaya State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission |
Order:
Ramesh Bawri, Sr. Member
-
This Appeal arises from the order dated 19.4.2005 passed by the District Forum in Complaint Case No. 27 of 2004, whereby a meagre sum of Rs. 3453 was awarded to the Complainant. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant/opposite party. None appears for the Respondent/Complainant. Perused the records. 5 (five) distinct instances of deficiency in service on the part of BSNL were raised by the Complainant in his Complaint and compensation to the tune of Rs. 38,000 on various counts was sought. These are reproduced below:
That as per rules of Cellone, application fee Rs. 500 and SIM activation fee of Rs. 200 will have to be adjusted in first subsequent Bills, but it is very unfortunate to state that after repeated request vide application to CAO, BSNL and several personal visits to the GMTD office, the amount of Rs. 700 still has not been adjusted even after the timely payment of 7th bill i.e. Bill for the month of September 2004.
Meanwhile I applied for the itemized bill for the month of March 2004 only with a charge of Rs. 50 mentioning in my application itself, but BSNL starts sending detail Bill from the month of April 2004 onwards for 3 subsequent bills charging an amount of Rs. 100 extra in each occasion ignoring my requirement of only one month. Later on, again after various requests' and applications to BSNL, the practice was stopped somehow with an additional amount of Rs. 300 (Rs. 100 x 3) billed on me.
While going through the above detail bill, I was surprised to find that some of the incoming and outgoing calls are charged twice with an appropriate excess bill of Rs. 153 (as enclosed). Moreover, calls made in March are again charged in the Bill of April also. The same was brought into notice of various BSNL officers including CAO and DGM (Mobile) vide several applications and complaints over Fax, but this time also it is very sorry to state that due to extreme negligence to their duties the excess amount was still not refunded to me even after 8 months of service period.
That an amount of Rs. 100 is charged as late fee in the Bills of May as well as in September even after the timely payment of each previous Bills much before the due date of payment. On repeated telephonic requests, complaints and several personal visits to the BSNL office taking leave from my work place, CAO agreed to rectify the late fee amount in each occasion. However, a total amount of Rs. 1828 is still showing as...
To continue reading
Request your trial