Present complaint has been filed by Smt. Pratima Chauhan (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against Reliance Jio Fiber (hereinafter referred to as the OP), on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, seeking relief therein that the OP be directed to immediately restore the Jio Fiber connection of complainant, to extent the service period without any additional ₹ cost, to pay ₹ 1,00,000/- as compensation on account of mental harassment and agony and to pay ₹ 25,000/- as litigation charges.

2. Briefly, the facts as emerge from the complaint are that the complainant has availed the services of OP against ID No.177313431 by making advance payment ₹ 2,824.92/- for recharge on 2nd March, 2025 for a period of six months. It is further stated that the complainant was active user of Jio Fiber services of OP and the recharge mentioned above was made for using internet services for her academic and daily purposes. It is also stated that on 09.04.2025 the services of OP disrupted and in this regard, the complainant lodged online complaint and received message that the issue will be resolved. It is further stated that the issue was not resolved and the complaint was cancelled. It is further stated that on 11.04.2025 the complainant received call from one Mr. Lakhan Rathore, an official of OP, and in the evening the said Mr. Lakhan Rathore visited the house of complainant and found breakage in the Jio Fiber wire and assured that same will be replaced. It is also stated that the said person told the complainant that the wire was lying in the vehicle and he would return within 10-15 minutes to complete the repair, but he did not turn up back after giving assurance. It is further stated that on 13.04.2025 the said person asked the complainant on telephone whether the issue has been resolved or not, to which, the complainant replied that wire was not replaced as was assured on 11.04.2025. It is further stated that the said Mr. Lakhan Rathore told the complainant that he will visit the house of complainant on 14.04.2025, but said Mr. Lakhan Rathore neither visited the house of complainant nor he responded the call of the complainant. It is also stated that the complainant again lodged online complaint and received message that the issue will be resolved, but the same was not resolved and the complaint was cancelled on 19.04.2026. It is further stated that every time when the complaint was lodged by the complainant the message was received that issue will be resolved, but the grievance of complainant was not redressed by the OP. It is further stated that one time the OP told the complainant that Engineer Ajay Kumar will attend the complaint of complainant being technician, but he never visited the house of complainant. It is further stated that the situation remained as it is even after filing of complaint and grievance of complainant was not redressed by the OP and as such, the complainant was compelled to file this complaint before this Commission against OP on the grounds of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP. Hence, this complaint. It is prayed that the complaint may be allowed as prayed for.

3. After admission of complaint, notice was issued to the OP and it (OP) contested the complaint by filing its reply, wherein, number of preliminary objections were taken and on merits, it is stated that the complainant has made advance ₹ recharge of 2,824.92/- on 02.03.2025 for a period of six months at her own. It is also stated that when the Jio Fiber services of complainant disrupted on 09.04.2025 then the complainant lodged online complaint and the complainant was assured on behalf of OP that the issue will be resolved, but without waiting for resolution of issue, the complainant cancelled the complaint on 10.04.2025. It is also stated that the OP is a reputed company and provide