BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI
Present Hon'ble Thiru Justice N. KANNADASAN, PRESIDENT
THIRU Pon. GUNASEKARAN, B.A.,B.L., MEMBER - I
(Against order in O.P.No.100/2004 on the file of the DCDRF,
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2008
The General Manager (Telecom),
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, :: Appellant/Opposite party
6-4/35 “J” Avenue, :: Respondent/Complainant
Viswanathapuram, rep. by Adv.S.Balasubramani
Pon. GUNASEKARAN, MEMBER
1. The above appeal is filed as against the order dt.27.07.2005 passed by the District Forum,
2. The complaint is filed by raising the contentions as follows:
The Respondent/Complainant was the Deputy Registrar in the
3. The complainant was shocked and surprised to receive the bills for huge amount since he has never used so many metered calls as found in the bills. The Complainant had doubt that his Telephone was misused by the Staff of the Appellant/Opposite Party by tampering the telephone line with the help of their own staff.
4. The Respondent/Complainant requested the Appellant/Opposite Party to furnish the details with regard to STD, ISD, “95” and the local calls made from his telephone. But the Appellant/Opposite Party never responded and disconnected the telephone without any notice on 30.11.2003. Hence the Respondent/Complainant was constrained to get a new telephone connection from private company.
5. Even though the complainant has sought for details as sated above, the appellant/opposite party furnished the telephone call details for STD, ISD only and informed that “95” calls and local calls print out could not provided. The Respondent/Complainant has complaint against the Staff of the Telephone Department, but they are not accepted.
6. Under the above said circumstances, the complaint is filed before District Forum seeking relief as stated hereunder.
7. The Appellant/Opposite Party resisted the complaint to effect that all the information required by the complainant were furnished and due to technical reasons the “95” and local calls pint out could not be provided. A further stand is taken to the effect is that if the telephone was locked properly nobody can misuse the same. Since telephone bill amount was not paid by the Respondent/Complainant, therefore, the telephone was disconnected on 30.11.2003.
8. Further, Appellant/Opposite Party contended that the Respondent/Complainant was provided locking facility and internet facility to his telephone. Hence all STD, “95” and Local Calls could have been made only by the Respondent/complainant himself or by his friends or his colleagues only. B.S.N.L. Department conducted a proper investigation and conducted all tests and proved that there is no defect in their equipments. If the complainant wants reconnection for his telephone, he has to clear the bills due and accordingly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
9. Ex.A1 to Ex.A24 were marked on the side of the Respondent/Complainant. Ex.B1 to Ex.B5 were marked on the side of the opposite party.
10. The District Forum on perusal of records, held that there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The opposite party was directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- as compensation for mental agony and to pay Rs.1,000/- towards costs to the complainant.
11. Aggrieved by this Order passed by the District Forum, the Appellant/Opposite Party has preferred present this Appeal.
12. We do not find any merits in the Appeal. The Appellant/Opposite Party contended that due to technical reasons, the details of “95” and local print out could not be provided and the telephone was disconnected since the bill amount was not paid by the complainant.
13. As per the decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission,
“the telephone department is bound to furnish
all the detailed investigation made by them in
the case of excess billing.”
14. In the light of the above observation, we are not able to appreciate the stand taken by the opposite party in refusing to furnish all the details of billing. In view of the fact that the opposite parties have failed to furnish all the necessary details and considering the fact that only in the disputed bills suddenly a huge amount is claimed, even though for the earlier period the complainant never utilized the telephone, we are of the opinion that the excessive bills were sent to the complainant probably due to misuse by the third parties, which was not properly investigated.
15. Having regard to what is stated above, we confirm the order of the District Forum and dismiss the Appeal. However there will be no order as to cost.
PON GUNASEKARAN N. KANNADASAN
INDEX : YES / NO