Tata Docomo — epabx

Address:

.S. Strategic Marketing Services, 52/4, Model Town ( West ) Opp. Navrang Cinema G.T.Road, Ghaziabad ( U.P.)PIN: 201001., New Delhi, Delhi, 201301

1. That at the outset, this grievance entail factual financial fraud on installation of nec sl-1000 epabx by nec reseller a. S. Strategic marketing services, 52/4, model town (West) opp. Navrang cinema g. T. Road, ghaziabad (U. P.) 201001.

2. That i (Hereinafter referred to as the “first party”) purchased an nec sl-1000 epabx from their reseller, dated 07.11.2017, from the addressee i. E. A. S. Strategic marketing services, 52/4, model town (West) opp. Navrang cinema g. T. Road, ghaziabad (U. P.) 201001 (Hereinafter referred to as the “third party”). The first party has been a consumer of the third party, and pursuant to such relationship, the first party after purchasing the equipment for the amount of. Rs. 63.720.00 - (Rupees sixty thousand, seven hundred and twenty only.),

3. Here, the first party purchased the nec sl-1000 epabx equipmnet, through a cheque on the instructions of the third party and performed her part of the contract by making payment for the equipment to the amount of rs. 63.720.00, including that of that voice logger for rs. 6, 500.00, and call details software of rs. 4, 500.00 which was paid to third party in advance.

4. That the first party was coerced by third party, sanjeev chaudhary to purchase additionally a voice logger for rs. 6, 500.00, and call details software of rs. 4, 500.00, in advance for the completing of installation, which was paid yet was never installed.

5. That the first party contacted (Hereinafter referred to) as the second party nec technologies india private limited, 101 to 116, 1st floor splendor forum, mathura road, 3 jasola district center, new delhi, delhi 110025 dated 08.10.2017 thru the website and was contacted by the second party who had referred this third party sanjeev chaudhary, the reseller, of second party. Third party who later on assisted and navigated the first party in buying the nec sl-1000 epabx equipment,

6. Thereafter, it was incumbent upon the third party as an obligation to acknowledge such payment and complete full and final installation. The first party after making the payment for the epabx, received a confirmation from the third party.
Chain of events
7. That, dated 08.10.2017 the first party mails a letter to second party india seeking for nec epabx installation. That in response the second party sends a reseller herein referred to as the third party a. S. Strategic marketing services to first party’s house for installation of nec sl-1000 epabx system,.

8. That dated 11.10.2017, representatives of third party varun and sanjeev chaudhary visits first party’s house for viewing at 11:30 am and leaves at 12:20. On the same day mr. Varun comes again at 5:15 and at 5:35 pm.

9. That dated 24.10.2017, third party, technician mr varun with another technician comes for hardware installation and assures the consumer that full work has been completed. Hence dated 06.11.2017, - first party pays the full amount of rs. 63.720.00, via axis bank cheque 333997 to third party.. However after making the payment when she checks her computer she realizes that the voice logger for the amount of rs. 6, 500.00, and call details software of rs. 4, 500.00 which was paid to third party in advance has not been installed.

10. Hence first party calls the second and third party both and informs them dated 06.11.2017, both these programs have not installed. Hence third party sends representatives ankit & varun who despite staying at first party’s house for full six hours only to inform that there is a software glitch and the programs could not be installed and will come again.
11. That ankit mehra was doing constituted the offence involving a computer, computer system or computer network located in india without the consent of first party.

12. The representative of third party knowingly or intentionally, destroyed or altered or source code used for a computer, computer program, computer system or computer network, when the computer source code is required to be kept or maintained by law that third party knowingly hacked with computer system. That the third party with the intent to cause or knowing that he is likely to cause wrongful loss or damage to first party therefore third party is accountable of destroying or altering information residing in a computer resource and diminished its value, utility thus injuriously by any means, committed hacking.

13. That dated 21.11.2017, first party files third grievance with second party, kiran mhatre again without any success. That dated 01.04.2018, first party comes back to india and talks to second party vijay sharma seeking for installation of software and again dated 07.04.2018, first party talks to second party vijay sharma, and he brings third party sanjeev choudhary & ankit 10:45 to 3:15 pm - who unsuccessfully trying to repair the infected computer but does not install the call logger or the audio software.
14. That dated 14.07.2018, second party vijay sharma confirms with first party and assures her that it will be installed.
15. That during the interregnum period the first party via e-mail and telephonic conversations requested the second party to clear the air regarding the purchase of voice logger and audio software; however, much dismay to the first party the second party and the third party consistently maintained that they will install it someday. The said stand of the second and third party was not only repugnant to the material evidence of the absence of installation but also unprofessional and uncanny so far as discharging their obligations.

That beginning 04.04.2018, upto today the first party has been requesting and talking with first party and others seeking resolution for this fraud by third party referred by the second party. That the second party took accountability and warranty for third party sanjeev choudhary and informed first party, that sanjeev choudhary’s father has expired he is mourning the death, and he will be contacting the first party once he recovers from the grief. That the first party has waited for nearly a year for third party mr. Sanjeev chaudhary to recover from his sorrow but appears that he is still suffering.
That dated 31.03.2019, a legal notice was mailed to third party for a refund of rs11000.00 yet first party has not received it till dated.
That the consumer is seeking a refund the amount of voice logger for rs. 6, 500.00, and call details software of rs. 4, 500.00 towards installation and purchase 10% interest for the period which you have illegally forfeited against the consumer