Boudh District Commission Directs Vodafone To Pay Compensation For Outdated Recharge Vouchers And Refund Security Deposit To The Distributors

Brief Facts:

Dusmanta Mishra (“Complainant”) entered into a distributorship agreement with Vodafone Idea Mobile Services Ltd. (“Vodafone”). To fulfil the requirements set by Vodafone, the Complainant submitted all necessary documents, including an undertaking cum indemnity in its favour. Further, the Complainant also deposited a refundable security deposit of Rs. 25,000/- with Vodafone via an A/C payee cheque, contingent upon its reimbursement upon the cancellation or discharge of the agreement. The Complainant claimed that he diligently executed his distributorship duties and maintained a satisfactory business relationship since the year 2019. However, Vodafone allegedly halted its network operations in the Boudh area without prior notification, resulting in the Complainant being left with pending Recharge Coupon Vouchers (RCV) valued at around Rs. 70,000/-. The Complainant approached Vodafone on multiple occasions but didn't receive any satisfactory response. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant filed a consumer complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Boudh, Odisha (“District Commission”). The Complainant contended that the company's actions caused financial losses to him.

Vodafone contended that the RCVs, once issued to the Distributors, cannot be refunded or purchased back. It also raised preliminary objection w.r.t to the District Commission's jurisdiction as an alternate remedy had already been provided under special acts such as the Indian Telegraphic Act, of 1885. Regarding the security deposit, Vodafone contended that it would only be refunded upon closing of all market formalities and submission of a written request by the distributor before the company.

Observations by the Commission:

The District Commission while referring to Vodafone's argument that RCVs once sold to distributors cannot be repurchased by the company, held that the argument was not sustainable in light of the specific circumstances of the case. The District Commission held that the issuance of RCVs in response to payments made by the Complainant, coupled with their subsequent redemption on various occasions upon demand, refuted Vodafone's general claim regarding the irreversibility of such transactions.

Further, the District Commission referred to the argument made by the company regarding the refund of the security deposit amount and noted that these statements appeared to hinge on generalities rather than addressing the specific circumstances of the Complainant's case. The District Commission held that the Complainant presented substantial evidence such as Andhra Bank's A/C Payee cheque made in favour of Vodafone for the amount of Rs. 25,000/-.

Consequently, the District Commission Vodafone is to refund Rs. 25,000 which was originally collected as the security charge from the Complainant. Additionally, the District Commission also directed Vodafone to pay a compensation of Rs.10,000 for the deficiency in service, Rs. 8,000 for mental agony, and Rs. 3,000 for the cost of litigation incurred by the Complainant.

Case Title: Dusmanta Mishra vs Vodafone Idea Mobile Services Ltd and Anr.

Case No.: C.C. No. 2/2021

Advocate for the Complainant: Complainant in person

Advocate for the Respondent: Dillip Kumar Nanda

Click Here To Read/Download The Order