SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TELEPHONE vs MANOJ KUMAR HASARIA

THIS appeal is directed against order dated 4.3.92 passed by the District Forum, Begusarai in Complaint Case No. 10 of 1991. The appellant before this Commission was opposite party and the respondent here was the complainant before the District Forum.

THE detail facts of the case are not required for the disposal of this appeal. It will suffice to mention that the complainant filed a case before the District Forum alleging that the telephone bills in question sent to him by the Opp. Party in respect of his telephone No. 2201 are inflated and excessive. On being noticed the opposite party appeared and filed written version stating inter alia that the complainant has got his own meter which is sealed and kept. under lock, that the bills in question sent to the complainant had been sent in accordance with the meter readings and that as the bills were not paid his telephone connection was disconnected. It has been further averred by the opposite party that there was no defect in the meter and therefore the bills sent to the complainant are correct and not inflated. THE complainant examined himself before the District Forum on oath in support of his case. The District Forum on taking into consideration the pleadings of the parties and the evidence of the complainant reduced the telephone bills for STD calls from 15.9.92 to 15.11.92 to Rs. 800.00, from Rs. 2352/- bringing down the bill for that period to Rs. 1678/- instead of Rs. 2228.00. Similarly it has reduced the bill for 16.11.90 to 15.1.91 to Rs. 800/- from Rs. 3279/- and the trunk call bills for that period to Rs. 453/- from Rs. 1129/-. Thus bringing down the bill for that period to Rs. 1453/- and similarly it has reduced the bill for the period 15.1.92 to 15.3.92 to Rs. 1716/- instead of ''Rs. 3418/-. The District Forum has also awarded Rs. 800.00 as damages for wrongful disconnection of the telephone of the complainant and directed that this amount be deducted from the aforesaid bills payable by the complainant.

The learned Counsel for the appellant has assailed the order of the District Forum mainly on the ground that the entire approach of the District Forum in deciding the case was illegal and unjustified. There is force in the submission on behalf of the appellant. It has been repeatedly held by the National Commission in number of cases that the Redressal Forums under the Consumer Protection Act (hereinafter called the Act) will not be legally justified in taking over the function of estimating by application of the rule of thumb. The previous number of calls made unless there is adequate evidence which may be either direct or circumstantial to show and establish that metering equipment was defective or there has been any misuse of the particular telephone by some unauthorised person in collusion with the employees of the department, particularly in case where the subscriber has the STD facility. Recently in the case of Telecom District Enginneer, Dharatnshalla v. Prem Nath Mahajan, I (1991) CPJ 200 (NCDRC) also it has been so observed by the National Commission.

IN the present case of course the complainant has examined himself on oath and stated that he maintains a register recording different calls from his telephone including the STD calls made by him and extracts from that register was produced by the complainant before the District Forum. He has stated in his evidence that he has a business of ready-made garments, woolen goods, raincoat etc. and that he has got three partners in that business. He has not said in his evidence that he alone uses that phone and that nobody else except him is allowed to use that telephone and that telephone is kept at a place inaccessible to others. Admittedly the complainant enjoys STD facility in his telephone. Under this circumstance it can not be said that the inflated bills which the complainant received were due to some defect in the metering equipments or due to use of that telephone by some unauthorised person in collusion with the employees of the department. Hence the District Forum was not justified in slashing the amounts mentioned in the telephone bills. Hence we find that the impugned order passed by the District Forum cannot be sustained.

IN the result we allow this appeal and quash the impugned order passed by the District Forum. There is no order, however, as to costs. Appeal allowed.