Union of India vs AVADHESH PRATAP SINGH

THIS appeal has been filed by the Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Telecom-munications and Divisional Engineer (Phones), Telecom. Department, Banda against the judgment and order dated 4.5.1999 passed by District Consumer Forum, Banda in Complaint Case No. 141/1997.

THE complainant, Avadhesh Pratap Singh of Banda had a telephone connection No. 22841. This telephone connection was installed across the Kain river in the Industrial Area where the complainant owns a stone crusher factory. THE telephone is used for business transactions relating to the stone crushing. THE telephone was out of order from 28.6.1997. THE complainant lodged a complaint before the department on 30.6.1997. THEreafter a number of oral requests were also made to the departmental officials and assurances were given but no efforts were made to energise the telephone connection. On 9.7.1997 the complainant again lodged a complaint with the telephone department which was duly registered but the telephone was not set right with the result that his business in regard to the stone crushing got obstructed and his business operations had to be closed. A complaint was again lodged on 11.7.1997 which was registered by the department again on 14.7.1997 but with no results. THE complainant, therefore, lodged a claim before the learned District Forum, Banda and the relief requested was that the telephone be ordered to be set right and the opposite party be ordered not to raise any bills for the period during which the telephone remained out of order. A compensation of Rs. 25,000/- because of loss of business was also claimed. A further compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for physical and mental torture was also claimed. The complaint dated 25.7.1997 was amended claiming that the opposite party may provide amended bill to the complainant and the telephone connection be energised after the payment of the amended bill is made by the complainant.

The case of the opposite party before the District Forum was that the bills sent to the complainant were perfectly in order which do not need any amendment and in case the complainant wants re-connection the same can be given to him after he deposits the charges duly levied. Since the payment has not been made even after six months, the telephone stands disconnected and has been installed elsewhere.

THE District Consumer Forum, after hearing both the parties, ordered that during the period from 28.6.1997 to 10.2.1998 when the telephone was out of order, no bill should be realised from the complainant. THE Forum also ordered that the telephone connection of the complainant be restored free of cost. An amount of Rs. 5,000/- was also awarded to the complainant for financial loss and mental and physical agony including the cost of proceedings. Aggrieved of this order, the Divisional Engineer (Phones) and Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Telecommunications have come in appeal.

IN the memo of appeal the appellant has admitted that the complainant had alleged that his telephone remained quite faulty often. The telephone of the complainant is installed 5 kms. away from the boundary of the Banda city and there is no consumer there except the complainant. The District Forum decided the case without taking into consideration the written statement as well as factual allegations submitted by the appellant. The direction of the learned District Forum not to charge the bills for eight months was illegal and arbitrary. The learned Forum has no power to modify or to cancel the departmental bills issued against the telephone subscribers. The Forum also cannot waive off the re-connection charges as well as rental charges of the telephone. The complainant was duly informed by the department about the dues pending against the said telephone connection before it was disconnected. We have heard the arguments of the two parties. Learned Counsel for the appellant has emphasised on the fact that the bills against the telephone connection in dispute were not cleared by the complainant for more than six months and in spite of that the telephone was not disconnected. The department waited for more than six months and when the charges were not paid, the connection was disconnected. On the other hand the learned Counsel for the respondent has stated that in spite of the complaints submitted to the department, and registered by them on 30.6.1997, 11.7.1997, and 14.7.1997, the telephone was not set right and during this period, no outstanding payment was due against the complainant. A perusal of file goes to show that the learned District Forum has not appreciated the evidence in its clear perspective. The written statement filed by the opposite party before the Forum clearly states that on 1.7.1997 the amount due for the telephone was Rs. 235/-. On 1.9.1997 the amount due was Rs. 410/- excluding the surcharges and right upto 1.3.1998 the amount due was charged at the rate of Rs. 210/- with the surcharges of Rs. 10/-. This is also admitted by the complainant that his telephone connection is 5 kms. away across the river from the main city of Banda. The written statement of the opposite party indicates that from 1.9.1997 onwards till 1.3.1998 the charges remained constant at Rs. 210/- plus Rs. 10/- surcharge levied from time to time. It appears that these charges are in terms of the telephone rent and the minimum cost. Page 2 of the written statement indicates that local meter was showing reading 4264 on 15.5.1997, on 15.7.1997 reading was 4482, on 31.7.1997 the reading was 4492, on 15.8.1997 the reading was 4516, on 15.9.1997 the reading was 4588, on 15.10.1997 the meter reading was 4636, on 18.11.1997 the meter reading was 4654, and on 30.11.1997 the reading was 4676. These readings go to show that the telephone may not have been working all the times but it did work off and on. It is natural for a telephone which is situated 5 kms. away from the town to show interrupted working especially when there is no connection in the vicinity. The appellant department had admitted that from 28.2.1998 to 15.8.1998 the reading of the meter remained constant at 4768. This shows that the telephone was not working from 28.2.1998 to 15.8.1998. The ground advanced by the appellant is that the payment due for the telephone was not cleared by the complainant and, therefore, it was got disconnected. A perusal of the complaint filed before the District Forum shows that the complainant has amended the allegations. He initially levelled charges against the department of Telecommunications. The amendment made in the complaint on 9.10.1998 shows that the complainant wanted a direction to be given to the opposite party that the telephone connection in question be restored after the complainant clears the charges. In the circumstances the appeal is liable to be allowed and the judgment and order passed by the District Consumer Forum, Banda on 4.5.1999 in Complaint Case No. 141/1997 deserves to be set aside and the complaint is liable to be dismissed. However, in case the complainant deposits the total charges levied for telephone connection then the concerned Divisional Engineer (Tele.) shall provide connection to the complainant within a period of 15 days of the date of the clearance of the outstanding. Order The appeal is allowed and the judgment and order of the learned District Forum is set aside and complaint dismissed. It is however, directed that in case the complainant deposits the outstanding charges with the department locally, then the telephone connection shall be provided to the complainant within 15 days of the deposit of dues. Let copy as per rules be made available to the parties. Appeal allowed.