Man wins Rs 19,700 payout from Reliance Jio over slow internet speed | Legal News

Consumer claimed service was not what he bought

• According to the case record, Aggarwal purchased a broadband fibre connection from Reliance Jio on March 13, 2024, paying Rs 12,729 in advance for a one-year plan. The connection was installed on March 14, 2024.
• However, he alleged that he soon discovered the installed service was not an optical fibre wired connection but a wireless one.
• When he questioned company representatives, they allegedly assured him that the service would function like a wired fibre connection and provide unlimited data.
• The issue surfaced within weeks. About 18 days after installation, Aggarwal began receiving messages informing him that his data quota had been exhausted and that he would have to pay for additional data usage.
• Feeling misled, he contacted Jio representatives and sought disconnection of the service on April 3, 2024, while also requesting a refund of the amount paid.

Repeated requests failed

The consumer told the forum that despite written requests and follow-up communications, the company failed to refund the money.

When his efforts did not produce any result, he approached the district consumer commission alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practices.

Notably, Reliance Jio and its representatives failed to appear before the district commission despite being served notices and were eventually proceeded against ex parte.

District commission orders refund

After considering the evidence placed on record, the district commission partly allowed the complaint on December 18, 2025.

The forum directed Reliance Jio to refund Rs 12,729 along with interest at 9 per cent per annum from March 13, 2024, until realisation. It also awarded Rs 7,000 towards compensation for harassment and litigation expenses.

The district commission observed that the company had neither provided the service as allegedly promised nor honoured its assurance regarding the refund.

“It is evident that the act of OPs in firstly not providing the product as assured to the complainant and thereafter even failing to refund the amount, despite of assuring to do so… amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice,” the district commission had held.

Jio’s defence before state commission

Challenging the order, Reliance Jio argued that the customer had knowingly opted for Jio AirFiber rather than a conventional wired Jio Fiber connection.

The company contended that the selected plan carried a 1,000 GB monthly data ceiling and that users who exceeded the limit were required to purchase additional data. According to Jio, the quota would be restored in the next billing cycle.

The company maintained that the terms of the plan were clear and that the district commission had erred in directing a refund.

Email promising refund became key evidence

• The state commission noted that the connection remained active only from March 14, 2024, until April 26, 2024, despite the consumer having paid for an entire year in advance.
• A key piece of evidence was an email sent by the company after recovering the device from Aggarwal’s residence. In the email, Jio informed him that the equipment had been found in working condition and that his eligible refund would be processed accordingly.
• However, despite that assurance, no refund was made.
• The commission observed that the consumer was ultimately forced to approach the courts after being unable to secure a resolution directly from the company.

Relief granted

• Refund of Rs 12,729.
• Nine per cent annual interest from March 13, 2024, until payment.
• Rs 7,000 towards compensation and litigation expenses.

Appeal dismissed

After examining the record and hearing the parties, the state commission found no fault with the district commission’s reasoning.

Holding that the district forum had correctly appreciated both the facts and the law, the commission dismissed Reliance Jio’s appeal and upheld the refund and compensation awarded to the consumer.