Idea Cellular penalised for failing to deactivate service
- BJP calls Rahul's take on Land Bill a 'white lie', wants him to apologise
- Presstitutes remark row: Modi says media ignoring V K Singh's good work in Yemen
- This govt is for the poor: PM Modi to BJP MPs
- 51 arrested for setting Puri-Barbil Express train coach on fire
- 24 dead, 28 rescued from Mediterranean migrant boat
Idea Cellular Limited has been penalized by UT District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum for not deactivating service on the request of a customer and indulging in unfair trade practice.
The complainant, Ram Kishan, alleged that he purchased a pre-paid mobile connection from Idea Cellular Limited in February, 2011. He stated that at the time of purchase, no facilities of caller tone, internet facilities or any other was opted for, by him. Ram alleged to have found eventually that the entire amount deposited by him for getting his account re-charged was being deducted. When he approached the customer care service, he was informed that he had availed of the service of caller tone service, leading to the deduction.
He further alleged that the amount continued to be deducted with every recharge and no action was taken by the company upon his complaint. In its written reply, the representative for Idea submitted that the complainant has himself activated the dialer tone by way of SMS in May 2011 and denied any unfair practice by them.
The forum observed that the complainant had been requesting the company for de-activation of the service since August 2011, but that the company did not seem to 'understand or realize that the complainant is not willing to avail of the service, despite even receiving a legal notice from the complainant to the said effect'. The forum further observed that the complaint was pertaining to the bill amount as well as the failure by the company to deactivate a service as per customer request.
The complaint was, thus, allowed and the cellular company was penalized of Rs 10,000 for the harassment caused to the customer due to the deficient services rendered by them in not de-activating the 'provided services', despite repeated requests. They were also directed to de-active the caller tone, internet and any other service for which the amount is being unnecessarily deducted and also activate the Do Not Disturb service. The company was also directed to bear the litigation costs of Rs 5,000