Case nº Consumer Complaint No. 235 of 2014 of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, August 01, 2014 (case Uttamkumar Samanta Vs Bharti Airtel Limited)
| Judge | For Appellant: Party-in-Person |
| President | J.M. Malik, J. (Presiding Member) and Dr. S.M. Kantikar, (Member) |
| Resolution Date | August 01, 2014 |
| Issuing Organization | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission |
Order:
J.M. Malik, J. (Presiding Member)
1. The gist of this complaint, where the complainant, Dr. Uttamkumar Samanta, has claimed more than Rs. 7.00 crores, is as follows. On 29.07.2010, the complainant took a prepaid mobile phone SIM Card and related connection from one of the authorized store, located at Patia, Bhubaneswar, Orissa, after submitting all necessary documents, proper identities and residential proof to Bharti Airtel Limited, OP1. However, the above said store was not made a party in this case because the complainant could not recollect the exact details of the store from where he had received the SIM for the telephone Thereafter, the complainant received numerous messages from OP1 for providing them identity proof and address verification, again and again This again harassed the complainant and made him run from pillar to post to keep OP1 updated about him very often The complainant submitted all those documents of identity and address proof to the store as well as to the local representative of OP1 in Bhuvaneshwar who had direct and physical communication with the store.
2. In June, 2011, the complainant shifted to Kolkata permanently.
He contacted the customer service of OP1. There was no response The complainant approached the customer centre, contacted the local centre at Salt Lake City Center and other places of OP1 in Kolkata, several times and requested them verbally to change his port of service of the said telephone to Kolkata.
3. The complainant lost his mobile on 4th January, 2012. FIR was lodged with the nearest Police station and submitted the same along with other documents related to his identities and address proof to the Salt Lake Centre, Kolkata of OP1 in order to get the new SIM card with his saved data in the SIM from OP1. Thereafter, he contacted the Zonal Office in Bhuvaneshwar, Orissa. However, OP1 did not arrange to give a new SIM for the said telephone to the complainant. They asked him to go to Orissa, out of his own expenses. The complainant also wrote email messages to OP1, Nodal Officer, Bhuvaneswar, on 13.01.2012 requesting for SIM replacement. The Nodal Officer, OP1, sent a reply on 14.01.2012 asking the complainant about some questions claiming as their norms. The reply was sent on the same day. The Nodal Officer again wrote to the complainant on 17.01.2012 that information of the complainant was not matching with the information incorporated into their system against the said telephone number and associated account. The complainant answered the questions, again, on 19.01.2012. The complainant was assured service within 72 hours, on 06.02.2012. The needful was not done as promised, so reminder was sent on 09.02.2012. They directed the complainant to visit their website, which meant that OP1 had not maintained proper citizen charter.
4. On 13.02.2012, the complainant got a new SIM from OP1, Kolkata at...
To continue reading
Request your trial