Failure To Provide Promised Fibre Connection: Chandigarh Consumer Commission Holds Reliance Jio Liable

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh, comprising President Amrinder Singh Sidhu and Member Brij Mohan Sharma, has held Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited and its officials liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for installing a wireless internet connection instead of the promised optic-fibre wired connection and for failing to refund the advance amount despite assurances.Brief Facts:The complainant, Sushil Kumar Aggarwal, purchased a broadband optic-fibre wired connection from Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. on 13.03.2024 after paying an advance amount of ₹12,729/- for one year. The connection was installed on 14.03.2024.Upon installation, the complainant discovered that instead of an optic-fibre wired connection, a wireless connection had been provided. When he objected, the opposite parties assured him that the wireless connection would function like a wired connection with unlimited data and also handed over a brochure to that effect.After about 18 days of usage, the complainant began receiving messages stating that his data had been exhausted and that he was required to recharge and pay for additional data. Feeling that he had been misled and sold the service under false commitments, the complainant contacted the opposite parties (OP-2 and OP-3) and requested disconnection and refund on 03.04.2024. He also submitted written requests and emails and issued notices to the opposite parties; however, no effective response or refund was provided.According to the complainant, despite the opposite parties acknowledging receipt of the returned device and assuring that the eligible refund would be processed, the amount was not refunded. Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, he approached the Consumer Commission seeking refund, interest, compensation, and litigation costs.The opposite parties did not appear before the Commission despite service of notice and were proceeded ex-parte.Observations and decision of the Commission:The Commission noted that although the complainant was initially assured that the wireless connection would function like a wired connection with unlimited data, he began receiving messages within 18 days that the data had been exhausted, requiring recharge and additional payment. The complainant thereafter raised grievances and generated multiple service requests and also sent emails seeking un-installation and refund.The record further showed that the opposite parties acknowledged receipt of the device and even assured that the eligible refund would be processed, yet no refund was made. Since the opposite parties failed to appear despite service of notice and were proceeded ex-parte, the allegations and evidence of the complainant remained unrebutted and uncontroverted, leading to an adverse inference against them.Holding the complaint to be justified, the Commission partly allowed the complaint and issued the following directions to the opposite parties:To refund ₹12,729/- to the complainant along with interest @ 9% per annum from 13.03.2024 till the date of actual realization.To pay ₹7,000/- to the complainant towards compensation for harassment and litigation expenses.Case Title: Sushil Kumar Aggarwal v. Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited & OthersCase N.: CC/115/2025Click Here To Read Order

Failure To Provide Promised Fibre Connection: Chandigarh Consumer Commission Holds Reliance Jio Liable

Praveen Mishra

Tags