NIVEDITA SHARMA Vs. BHARTI TELE VENTURES & ORS
DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Bharti Tele Ventures And Ors
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) IT is very sad and disheartening that in spite of there being lacs of consumers of mobile telephone services being rendered by Cellular Operators, there is hardly anyone who knows that he can take the service providers to task for breach of right to 'privacy' and 'right to be not disturbed' and those indulging in unsolicited commercial communications, SMSs, or telemarketing, with whom they have neither any acquaintance nor intimacy nor any business or official dealings, for creating nuisance and disturbance in their day -to -day work.
(2.) IN our view, these consumers are either ignorant or indifferent or insensitive to their rights or are non -chalant as they prefer to suffer in silence, fume and fret and curse the service providers or the persons who indulge in such activities and send tremors of tension and bouts of blood pressure.
(3.) ON the aforesaid premise, we treat this complaint as a complaint filed by the complainant on her behalf and on behalf of numerous other consumers, having the same interest and sufferings, as contemplated by Section 12(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and, more so, when the Cellular Operators Association of India to which O.P. 1 - Airtel, i.e. Bharti Televenture, is one of the members, intervened and sought impleadment as an intervener, and was. allowed to be impleaded as opposite party No. 5, as it wanted to put up a joint front on behalf of other members who are not impleaded as parties to these proceedings.
There are two sets of O.Ps. One is O.Ps. 1 and 2, who are service providers and O.Ps. 3 and 4 who are the banks accused of charge of tele -marketing and sending unsolicited commercial communications, calls that include SMSs, or other commercial or marketing messages.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.