Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Sunday, Apr 06, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Sunday, Apr 06, 2008 ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tamil Nadu |
 |
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |
Tamil Nadu
Cellular firm held responsible for not having acted on written request Failure to act on the complaint is a deficiency in service Coimbatore: The Coimbatore District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (CDCRF) has slapped a fine of Rs 25,000 on cellular service provider Aircel on charges of having caused mental agony owing to deficiency in service. An advocate S.T. Soundarrajan had preferred a complaint with the Consumer Forum stating that he had an Aircel cellular connection under the prepaid segment and said that the cellular firm had deducted Rs. 346 from his mobile account for value added service. The cellular service provider had stated that the deduction of Re. 1 from the prepaid mobile account of the subscriber every day towards the rent for the SMS facility. The complainant made it clear that he had never opted for any value added service such as Short Message Service (SMS) over phone to the customer call centre. With the cellular firm not stopping the practice of deducting Re. 1, the subscriber preferred a written complaint for which there was no response from the opposite party. The respondent continued with the deduction of Re. 1 per day as SMS rental charge. In a complaint filed before the forum, the complainant maintained that the cellular firm through unfair and unethical trade practices had caused mental agony through deficiency in service. The cellular firm in its counter averred that the prepaid subscribers were given an option to opt for SMS facility at Re. 1 per day or zero rental plan wherein every SMS would be charged at 25 paise. The complainant had not responded to the alert from the service provider and said that the respondent had stated that he had sent in his request to a call centre number which was not handling requests of this nature. The service provider also said that the tariff plans are strictly in adherence to the guidelines of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India.Holding the cellular firm responsible for not having acted on the written request of the complainant, the forum led by President, S.A. Sreeramulu and members P. Madhavi and K. Rathinam held that failure to act on the complaint is a deficiency in service causing mental agony and added that it was an unfair and unethical trade practice. Hence, the forum directed the cellular firm to repay the Re. 1 deducted every day and for the mental agony, it called for payment of compensation of Rs. 25,000 within one month of the date of the order. Failing which, the cellular firm would have to pay an interest of 9 per cent on the award amount and the petitioner was at liberty to take action against the cellular firm under section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |
Copyright © 2008, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
