Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal commission dismissed the appeal filed by Airtel confirming the order passed by District Forum.
Complainant Rohit Sharma had complained before the district forum about the illegal deduction of Rs. 200 from his main account. It was alleged that 148 rupees was credited to the account of the complainant whereas did not credited remaining 52 rupees and thus committed deficiency in service. Further consumer forum allowing the said complaint and ordered the Airtel Company to pay Rs.52 to the complainant along with Rs.2000 compensation was awarded to the complainant. The forum also ordered company to pay litigation cost to the complainant Rs.4000.
The submission of Airtel company in the appeal before the state forum was that there is remedy present under section 7-B of Indian Telegraph Act. However the bench by rejecting the contentions observed: "It is well settled law that under section 3 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 remedy under Consumer Protection Act 1986 is additional remedy. It is well settled law that Consumer Protection Act 1986 is enacted to protect the interest of consumer. It is also well settled law that there is no provision under Consumer Protection Act 1986 which bars filing of consumer complaint by consumer on the concept of alternative remedy. Opposite parties have received consideration amount from complainant for service rendered and present matter falls within definition of consumer as defined under section 2(d) of Consumer Protection Act 1986."
The commission said that the present matter can be disposed under Consumer Protection Act 1986.Thus the bench dismissed the appeal of Airtel Company and reaffirmed the order of District forum.
86540
103860
630
114
59824