The main legal point established in the judgment is the burden of proof in consumer complaints and the violation of privacy rights under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

ORDER

V.B. Gupta, Presiding Member - Since all the above noted appeals arise out of common order dated 26.12.2006, passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (for short, 'state Commission') all these appeals are being disposed of by present common order.

2. Brief facts are that complainant - Ms. Nivedita Sharma-Complainant (Respondent No. 1 herein) filed a complaint before the State Commission on the allegations that she is a valid subscriber of the GSM mobile services provided by Bharti Tele-Ventures-Appellant No. 2/O.P. No. 1 (in F.A. No. 52 of 2012) under the brand name, Airtel. The complainant subscribed to the post-paid services provided by it since the year 2006. At the time of taking the connection a kit was provided to the complainant which inter alia included terms and conditions governing the services to be provided by Airtel to the complainant as a subscriber. It is alleged that about a year after subscribing to the post paid connection, complainant started getting calls from various banks/financial institutions and other companies for marketing their products and services. Initially such unwarranted calls were ignored; however, soon the frequency of calls started increasing and on certain days the complainant used to receive around ten to fifteen calls causing tremendous disturbances. The complainant lodged a complaint with the customer service of the Airtel. There was however, no response of these complaints and the menace continued uninterrupted.

3. Thereafter a written complaint was lodged with the Airtel. In the said complaint, complainant clearly emphasized the fact that such unsolicited calls were not only severely disrupting complainant's work but also posed a grave threat and jeopardized safety and security of the complainant, due to the sharing of her confidential information such as name, address and financial standing, etc. That compelled by such circumstances, the complainant lodged another complaint with the Customer Service Department of the Airtel about the unsolicited calls and SMS. The complainant clearly instructed the opposite party that the complainant should not receive any such calls or SMS in future. In response to such complaint, even though the SMS from the Airtel ceased, the calls and SMS from banks/financial institutions continued unabated.

4. The lackadaisical attitude of the Airtel compelled the complainant to serve a notice on it, vide its letter dated December 24, 2004 claiming damages to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000 (Rupees ten lacs only) towards the harassment and trauma suffered by the complainant due to constant calls from various banks/financial institutions and other financing companies for tele-marketing their products and service. In the said notice, the complainant categorically reiterated its concern that such unsolicited calls not only disrupted complainant's work but also gravely jeopardized the complainant's safety and security. Additionally, the complainant pointed out that such calls caused a lot of mental distress/strain as a lot of such callers misbehaved when they did not receive positive response or were questioned as to the source of their information. Further, vide the aforesaid notice, the complainant demanded the Airtel to restrain with immediate effect from providing any further information to any one regarding complainant's personal information like mobile number, name, address or other such details and requested it to recall all information provided to such banks/companies or to any other company dealing with such data.

5. It is also alleged that Airtel or its officials have made absolutely no effort at their end to respond to the said complaint. The complainant continues to be harassed by such banks/financial institutions, etc.

6. It is further stated that as per the contractual obligations of Airtel, it was clearly bound to maintain the confidentiality of the personal and private information of the subscribers. The Privacy Statement clearly st