The East District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum held the company liable to pay the amount saying there was no document on record that it had issued notice to its service subscriber prior to disconnecting her services.
"There is not a single document on record to show that the opposite party (Idea Cellular) issued any notice to the complainant before disconnecting the services to her number and allotting the same to a third person.
Singhla, in her complaint, had alleged that services to her number, which she had been using since 2008, were stopped by Idea in 2009 without giving any notice to her and her number was alloted to someone else, again, without informing her.
She alleged that since her number was of a type which was in demand, it was alloted to someone else by the telecom major without her knowledge.
This contention was, however, disputed by Singhla who said Idea had been regularly sending bills to the address given by her.
The forum rejected Idea's contention saying it had not filed any document to show the address given by Singhla was false or forged.
