Sify:  Yet To Pay Rs. 8,200
By Bala Shah

It was a classic David and Goliath battle.  At one end, you have corporate giant Sify which was selling a broadband service not up to the mark.  At the receiving end, Cyber lawyer Ankur Raheja was the brave consumer who refused to suffer silently and chose to challenge a house hold name like Sify.

Ankur sought justice from the legal system.  After a courageous 2-year battle, the Delhi District Consumer Court ruled in his favour.  Sify was ordered to pay him a total of Rs. 8.200 in Oct, 2006.

A wave of elation swept through the suffering Indian internet users.  Somebody had taken on a giant ISP and won.  Prestigious national newspapers like ‘Times of India’ commended Ankur. 

Sadly, a few big Indian companies seem to be a law onto themselves.  Till today,  Sify has yet to pay up or appeal the court judgement against them.  Ankur has not given up hope.  The Consumer Court is in the process of recruiting  Magistrates to replace the 2 who have retired.  Once the quorum of Magistrates is available, the battle against Sify will continue.

(Techgoss published the following story in Nov, 2006)

Sify Pays Customer Rs. 5000 For Mental Agony

Cyber lawyer Ankur Raheja needed a broadband internet connection for his work in 2004.  And so Ankur signed up to pay Rs. 600 a month for Sify’s internet connection which promised a minimum speed of 32 to 48 Kbps.   Unfortunately for Ankur, Sify reduced the speed to 14 Kbps under some conditions.

Unfortunately for Sify, Ankur Raheja was not willing to accept that level of slow service. And the run around from the Customer Service Section.   And unlike most Indian consumers, he decided to do something.  Ankur filed a legal case against Sify in the Delhi District Consumer Court.  The court case dragged on for 2 years.

Last week, the Court came down heavily against Sify with the following judgement:“It has been held that concealing hidden condition and not redressing the grievances of the complainant who made complaints with regard to poor customer service on number of occasions, in our considered opinion, amounts to deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party and indulging in to Unfair Trade Practice.

We, therefore, direct the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs 1,200/-, paid for two months by the complainant along with compensation to the tune of Rs 5,000/- for causing mental agony and harassment to the complainant and further, pay a sum of Rs 2,000/- towards cost of litigation to the complainant.

Further, Court has also held that Opposite Party has failed to provide minimum speed of 256 Kbps as per the definition of Broadband as laid down by Telecom Regulatory Authority of India." i.e. Hon'ble Court interpreted the matter from the point of view of TRAI's definition of Broadband, which lays down criterion of minimum speed of 256 Kbps to be regarded as broadband. Therefore court held providing 14 Kbps speed instead of 256 Kbps is no service at all “

(Techgoss Note:  Cyber lawyer Ankur Raheja has now switched over  to internet service provider MTNL TriBand who give him a reliable 256 Kbps.  SIFY has been given 30 days to give him his payment)