Union of India vs AZAB SINGH RAWAT

THIS is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 3.4.2001 passed by District Consumer Forum, Bulandshahr in Complaint Case No. 1/1998. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that complainant applied for a telephone and deposited a sum of Rs. 500/- on 16.5.1995. Telephone No. 28176 was sanctioned. When the complainant contacted the opposite party for installation of telephone he was told that material has not been received hence telephone cannot be installed. It will be installed when the material is received. It is further alleged that the complainant received a telephone bill dated 1.11.1997 for Rs. 108/-. The complainant contacted the opposite parties and told that when no telephone has been installed at his residence how the bill has been sent but nothing was done. Thereafter the complainant filed the complaint.

THE opposite parties in written version have alleged that complainant had applied for public telephone after depositing Rs. 500/-. It was alleged that Gram Panchayat has given permission for installation of the telephone. It is further alleged that complainant under conspiracy did not get the telephone installed at his place but got the same installed at the residence of Pradhan. The parties led their evidence before the District Consumer Forum who after considering the facts of the case came to the conclusion that no telephone was installed at the place of complainant and directed the opposite parties to instal the telephone at the residence of complainant within 45 days and awarded Rs. 1,000/- as compensation and Rs. 400/- as cost.

Aggrieved against the said judgment and order the opposite parties have come in appeal.

WE have heard the Counsel for appellant without issuing notices to the opposite party as the fate of the judgment would have been same if notice was issued. A perusal of the complaint as well as written statement goes to show that the complainant applied for installation of telephone at his place. There is nothing to show that complainant has ever given his consent to opposite parties for installation of telephone at the place of Pradhan.

COUNSEL for the appellant argued that the telephone was installed at the residence of Pradhan with the consent of complainant. There is no evidence to prove the same. Therefore, the judgment and order passed by District Forum are perfectly correct and we do not find any reason to interfere the same. The appeal is liable to be dismissed. ORDER The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order passed by District Forum are confirmed. Let compliance of the order be made within a period of two months from the date of this order. Let copy as per rules be made available to the parties. Appeal dismissed.