Google Play App Store

Legal NewsNews Legal BlogsLaw Blogs Branding BlogsBranding Blogs All Legal News and BlogsAll Blogs Legal JobsLegal Jobs

Unwanted Deduction of Money By Mobile Operators Impose Penalty by SCDRC Unwanted Deduction of Money By Mobile Operators Impose Penalty by SCDRC

Bronze medal Reporter Adv. Lakshmi Posted 16 May 2019 Post Comment Visitors: 154 Read More News and Blogs
Unwanted Deduction of Money By Mobile Operators Impose Penalty by SCDRC

A quasi-judicial commission which set up in the year of 1988, to address the consumer related complaint which comes under the Consumer Protection Act of 1986. Recently HP State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission holds the order passed by District Consumer Forum, a customer complaint against the Airtel on unwanted withdrawal. Today complaints against mobile companies and Banks for the unwanted deduction of money are very high. In this case, the complaint was made by Rohit Sharma, a customer of Airtel who complain that company deducted an amount of 200 from his account and then charged an amount of 148 for the caller tune. He submits the complaint in front of the District Forum. He also states that they are not ready to credit the balance amount of 52/- rupees as well.  For all of these courts ordered fine amount for Rupees 56/- with 9% interest per year which is equal to an amount of 2000 rupees and litigation charge of 4000/- as well to the customer.

Company made statement that there is remedy for these kind of problem which is special remedy Section 7-B of the Indian Telegraph Act deal with this.

Arbitration of disputes.—

(1) Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, if any dispute concerning any telegraph line, appliance or apparatus arises between the telegraph authority and the person for whose benefit the line, appliance or apparatus is, or has been, provided, the dispute shall be determined by arbitration and shall, for the purposes of such determination, be referred to an arbitrator appointed by the Central Government either specially for the determination of that dispute or generally for the determination of disputes under this section.

(2) The award of the arbitrator appointed under sub-section (1) shall be conclusive between the parties to the dispute and shall not be questioned in any Court].

Justice Rana chaired the bench and he made a statement that

“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.". For more deails refere lawyers in India.

Click on the image to read more about INTERESTING FACTS ON RANBIR PENAL CODE

lawyers in India

Note:- We try our level best to avoid any kind of abusive content posted by users. Kindly report to us if you notice any,

Post Comment Post Comment

Enter the characters in the box below

Copyright @ Pathmpor Consultants Pvt Ltd