Karnal District Commission Holds Airtel And Vodafone Liable For Disconnecting Mobile Connection Despite Receiving Payment Of Dues

Brief Facts:

The Complainant purchased two numbers with postpaid connections from Idea/Vodafone by paying Rs. 50,000/-. Subsequently, these numbers were ported to Airtel and the Complainant began availing Airtel's services, regularly fulfilling payment obligations. However, Airtel demanded Rs. 290/- which the Complainant owed to Idea/Vodafone. Upon receiving this information, the Complainant promptly paid Rs. 290/- and submitted the receipt and informed Airtel. Despite the payment, Airtel terminated services for the numbers. The Complainant requested Airtel to restore the connections. However, no resolution was provided. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karnal, Haryana (“District Commission”) and filed a consumer complaint against Airtel and Vodafone.

Airtel raised preliminary objections concerning maintainability, jurisdiction, and cause of action. On the merits, Airtel denied receiving payment from the Complainant for the connections and stated that services were discontinued due to outstanding dues. On the other hand, Vodafone argued that the Indian Telegraph Act provides a specific remedy under Section 7-B, mandating arbitration for disputes concerning telegraph services.

Observations by the District Commission:

The District Commission noted Airtel's contentions that the Complainant's mobile connections were disconnected due to an outstanding amount of Rs. 290/-. However, it held that the burden of proof rested on Airtel to substantiate this claim. Despite this, Airtel and Vodafone failed to provide compelling evidence to support their arguments. Conversely, the District Commission noted that the Complainant produced a copy of the receipt which stated the payment of the outstanding dues for the said mobile connections. Consequently, the District Commission held that Airtel and Vodafone's action in disconnecting the Complainant's connections constituted deficient service and unfair trade practice.

Consequently, the District Commission directed Airtel and Vodafone to restore the connections and to reassign the mobile numbers to the Complainant. If these connections had been assigned to other individuals and thus cannot be restored to the Complainant, the District Commission directed Airtel and Vodafone to reimburse the Complainant with the sum of Rs. 50,000/-, which was initially paid for the acquisition of said connections. Furthermore, the District Commission directed them to compensate the Complainant with Rs. 15,000/- for the mental distress and harassment endured, along with the litigation expenses incurred by the Complainant.

Case Title: Arvind Mohan vs M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd and Others