BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

=====

Complaint Case No.: 1178 of 2008

Date of Decision : 29.01.2009

Abdul Sattar Banney Khan Son of Banney Khan, resident of

House No.4032, Sector 56, Chandigarh.

Complainant

V E R S U S

Spice Communication Ltd., C-105 Phases-VII, Industrial Area,

Mohali 160055

..Opposite Party

CORAM: SH.JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL PRESIDENT

SH.SIDDHESHWAR SHARMA MEMBER

DR.(MRS) MADHU BEHL MEMBER

Argued by: Complainant in person.

None for OP.

PER SH.JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, PRESIDENT

The complainant was subscriber of pre-paid mobile connection

bearing No.9855995358 provided by OP Company and its

validity was likely to complete on 15.10.2008. It is averred that

before the completion of validity period of said connection, the

OP Company made an offer/call to the complainant for getting

lifetime validity of said connection on deposit of Rs.35/- each

for three monthly only. The complainant, as such, deposited

the said amount, but inspite of that his connection was

disconnected by the OP Company without any notice and rather

a bill of Rs.918.51 Paise was sent to him whereas he has never

requested or applied for Changing his pre-paid connection into

post-paid connection. It is also averred that due to this

deficient act of OP, the complainant has to suffered mentally

and physically, hence this complaint.

2] OP filed reply and admitted that the Complainant subscribed

to pre-paid connection. It is stated that the complainant

himself requested for migration of its connection from pre-paid

to post-paid and has duly submitted a subscriber application

form signed by him to the company on 20.8.2008. It is also

stated that in pursuance to his request for migration of its

connection, his address verification etc. was also done on

23.8.2008. Further, it is stated that the connection of

complainant was suspended as he failed to pay the outstanding

dues. Denying all other allegation, it is prayed that complaint

be dismissed.

3] Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

4] We have heard the complainant and have perused the record.

5] The contention of the OP is that the Complainant had

requested them through an application to change his pre-paid

connection to post paid, upon which the said connection was

converted. They did not produce the said application, along

with reply filed by them. The Complainant denied if he ever

requested for any such change. Opportunities were granted to

the OP to produce the application, if any, moved by the

Complainant in this regard, but they have failed to produce any

such written request for conversion of the pre-paid connection

into post paid. We are, therefore, of the opinion that no such

request was made by the Complainant for changing his pre-

paid connection to post paid connection.

6] It is a case in which the OP themselves changed the pre-paid

connection to post paid connection and caused harassment to

 the Complainant. When he was using a pre-paid connection, he

knew how many calls he intended to make and the charges

therefor, were also lesser as compared to the post paid

connection. He could manage his accounts and recharge the

connection as and when needed. If the OP provided him any

such facility of post paid connection without request, they are

not entitled to recover any thing from the Complainant nor is

Complainant legally bound to pay any such billing charges. We

are, therefore, of the opinion that the OP is not entitled to

recover any amount for the post paid connection nor the one

mentioned in their bill dated 22.9.2008.

7] The Complainant already has the pre-paid connection which

shall continue so long as he gets it recharged in accordance

with the requirements of the OP. The present complaint,

therefore, succeeds and the same is accordingly, allowed. The

OP is directed not to recover any amount for the post paid

connection granted to the Complainant. They shall permit him

to continue with the pre-paid connection, so long as he

recharges the same in accordance with the scheme opted by

him. The Complainant is entitled to Rs.500/- as costs of

proceedings, which shall be paid to him within 30 days from

the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

8] Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost. The

file be consigned.

29.01.2009
Jan.29,200 [Dr.(Mrs) Madhu Behl] [Siddheshwar Sharma] [Jagroop Singh Mahal]
9
Member Member President
 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

CHANDIGARH

Abdul Sattar …Complainant

Versus

Spice Communication Pvt. Ltd. & another … Opposite Parties

Written Statement on behalf of respondent

RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

PRELIMINIARY OBJECTIONS:

1. That the present application filed by the applicant is liable to be dismissed on the

ground that the complainant has got no grievance as regards the deficiency in service in

concerned and the present complaint filed by the complainant does not disclose any cause

of action as regard the opposite party is concerned. It is pertinent to mention here that the

complainant has himself got his connection migrated from pre-paid to post-paid and has

duly filled the subscriber agreement form and had submitted all the relevant documents to

the company on 20/8/2008. Thus, the telephone connection has been changed from pre-

paid to postpaid on the request of the complainant himself and as such the present

complaint filed by him at his instance is not maintainable. It is pertinent to mention here

that in pursuance to the request of the complainant, his address verification was also done

on 23/8/2008 and his wife was present at the address mentioned in the identity proof and

she told that the complainant is a teacher at Paragon School Sector 70, Mohali. Thus, the

complainant have any grievance and the present complaint has been filed just to grab

compensation.

2. That present complaint is liable to be dismissed on the ground that the complainant

has not brought true facts before this Hon’ble Court and has rather concealed material facts

from this Hon’ble Court and as such the present complaint is liable to be dismissed with

costs.

ON MERITS :

1. That in reply to this para it is submitted that the complainant was having a prepaid

connection. The complainant himself requested for migration of its connection from pre-
paid to post-paid and has duly submitted a subscriber application form signed by him to the

company on 20/8/2008 and on the request of the complainant after following the procedure

as prescribed for address verification etc., the complainant was migrated from pre-paid to

post-paid. It is however, denied that the complainant was ever misled that he would be

given life time validity connection.

That the contents of this para are wrong and hence denied. It is further denied that

the bill has been wrongly raised. It is further denied that the complainant has not given any

request for migration of his connection from pre-paid to post-paid.

That the contents of this para are wrong and hence denied. It is further denied that

the complainant has suffered any mental harassment because of any act on the part of the

opposite party. It is further denied that the mobile connection has been suspended because

of any fault on the part of the opposite party. It is pertinent to mention here that as the

complainant has failed to pay the outstanding due and as such his connection has been

suspended.

That the contents of this para are wrong and hence denied. It is further denied that

any harassment has been caused to the complainant because of any act of the part of

opposite party. It is further denied that the complainant is entitled for any compensation.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the in view of the facts and

circumstances narrated above the present complaint being devoid of any merit may kindly

be dismissed in the interest of justice.

CHANDIGARH OPPOSITE PARTY

THROUGH COUNSEL:

DATED:

(VISHAL GUPTA & NITIN SHARMA)

ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTY

VERIFICATION:
Verified that the contents of para no.1 & 2 of preliminary objections and that of on merits are true

and correct to my knowledge and the record maintained by the opposite party. No part of it is false and

nothing has been concealed therein.

CHANDIGARH

DATED:
OPPOSITE PARTY
 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

CHANDIGARH

Abdul Sattar …Complainant

Versus

Spice Communication Pvt. Ltd. & another … Opposite Parties

Affidavit of Y.S.Bains, Vice President, Corporate

Support Group, M/s Spice Communications Ltd., C-

105, Industrial Area, Phase-VII, Mohali.

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-

PRELIMINIARY OBJECTIONS:

1. That the present application filed by the applicant is liable to be dismissed on the

ground that the complainant has got no grievance as regards the deficiency in service in

concerned and the present complaint filed by the complainant does not disclose any cause

of action as regard the opposite party is concerned. It is pertinent to mention here that the

complainant has himself got his connection migrated from pre-paid to post-paid and has

duly filled the subscriber agreement form and had submitted all the relevant documents to

the company on 20/8/2008. Thus, the telephone connection has been changed from pre-

paid to postpaid on the request of the complainant himself and as such the present

complaint filed by him at his instance is not maintainable. It is pertinent to mention here

that in pursuance to the request of the complainant, his address verification was also done

on 23/8/2008 and his wife was present at the address mentioned in the identity proof and

she told that the complainant is a teacher at Paragon School Sector 70, Mohali. Thus, the

complainant have any grievance and the present complaint has been filed just to grab

compensation.

2. That present complaint is liable to be dismissed on the ground that the complainant

has not brought true facts before this Hon’ble Court and has rather concealed material facts

from this Hon’ble Court and as such the present complaint is liable to be dismissed with

costs.
ON MERITS :

1. That in reply to this para it is submitted that the complainant was having a prepaid

connection. The complainant himself requested for migration of its connection from pre-

paid to post-paid and has duly submitted a subscriber application form signed by him to the

company on 20/8/2008 and on the request of the complainant after following the procedure

as prescribed for address verification etc., the complainant was migrated from pre-paid to

post-paid. It is however, denied that the complainant was ever misled that he would be

given life time validity connection.

That the contents of this para are wrong and hence denied. It is further denied that

the bill has been wrongly raised. It is further denied that the complainant has not given any

request for migration of his connection from pre-paid to post-paid.

That the contents of this para are wrong and hence denied. It is further denied that

the complainant has suffered any mental harassment because of any act on the part of the

opposite party. It is further denied that the mobile connection has been suspended because

of any fault on the part of the opposite party. It is pertinent to mention here that as the

complainant has failed to pay the outstanding due and as such his connection has been

suspended.

That the contents of this para are wrong and hence denied. It is further denied that

any harassment has been caused to the complainant because of any act of the part of

opposite party. It is further denied that the complainant is entitled for any compensation.

Chandigarh Deponent
Dated :

Verification :

Verified that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge as

per the record maintained by the company. No part of it is false and nothing has been

concealed therefrom.

Chandigarh Deponent
Dated :