AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THIS is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 13.8.1993 passed by District Consumer Forum, Sultanpur in complaint case.
THE facts of the case stated in brief are that the petitioner had a telephone connection bearing No. 3125. He has disputed the bill dated 1.12.1992 for a sum of Rs. 7,127/-. In the complaint, he has mentioned that he received five earlier bills from 1.10.1991 to 1.10.1992 which were not more than Rs. 808/-. According to the complainant he never received such a heavy amount of bill. As the complainant did not deposit this amount, the telephone connection was disconnected. According to the opposite party at Sultanpur, there is an Electronic Telephone Exchange and the bills are computerised. It is alleged that the disputed bills issued to the complainant are correct.
The learned District Consumer Forum, after mentioning various rulings cited by the learned Counsel for the opposite party, came to the conclusion that the disputed bill is of higher amount and has directed for deposit of Rs. 867/- as amount of the bill and to restore the connection on deposit of this amount.
AGGRIEVED against this order, the appellant, Telephone Department has come in appeal and has challenged the correctness of the order passed by learned District Consumer Forum. When the appeal was called for hearing none was present, even though both the parties were informed of the date fixed on service postage stamp. A perusal of the judgment of the learned District Forum will go to show that it has not given any reason as to why the disputed bill has been revised to Rs. 867/-. It is alleged by the appellant/opposite party in the written statement that there is an Electronic Exchange at Sultanpur. It has been mentioned in para 3 of the grounds of appeal that the Electronic Telephone Exchange has S.T.D. facility and the bills are prepared by computer.There is no allegation from the side of the complainant that S.T.D. facility was not available to the complainant. Therefore, keeping in view the facts of the case, the S.T.D. facility was available to the complainant. It cannot be said that the bill which has been received by the complainant was excessive. Thus keeping in view the facts of the case, the appeal has to be allowed. ORDER The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of the learned District Forum are set aside, and the complaint is dismissed. There will be no order as to cost. Let copy of this order be made available to the parties as per rules. Appeal allowed.