SUDHIR KAPOOR Vs. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for issuance of a writ quashing the award dated 31.12.1998 passed by respondent No. 2 under Section 7(B) of the Indian Telegraph Act.

(2.) There were two telephone connections, both in the name of the petitioner. Telephone No. 6801740 was released to the petitioner sometime in November, 1989 alongwith STD/ISD facilities. The said telephone was however, disconnected in the month of October, 1993. On the basis of another application filed by the petitioner he was allotted with another telephone No. 6803600 which was released in the month of October, 1991 and the said telephone also had STD/ISD facilities. So far as telephone No. 6801740 was concerned regular bills were not issued from time- to-time due to fault in the computer but a bill with due date of payment as 18.5.1993 was issued to the petitioner for the period from 30.5.1990 to 15.4.1993. The said bill included charges for rent, installation charges and interest on initial deposit alongwith call charges to the tune of Rs. 9,46,123.80. Thereafter two more bills were issued to the petitioner which were respectively for the amounts of Rs. 1,34,463.00 and Rs. 15,495.00 making a total of Rs. 12,98,685.00. For non-payment of the aforesaid bills the telephone No. 6801740 was disconnected on 27.10.1983. Even after the same as the dues were not paid the other telephone of the petitioner namely - telephone No. 6803600 was also ought to be disconnected and at that stage the petitioner filed a writ petition in this Court which was registered as C.W. 4285/1994. It was stated in the said writ petition by the petitioner that the petitioner has only been given the first page of the bill and accompanying pages were not delivered to the petitioner and without giving details of the bills it was submitted, that no recovery be made fr&n the petitioner in respect of the said bills.

(3.) This Court 'considered the submission of the Counsel appearing for the parties and on consideration thereof found that the document namely - bill dated 18.5.1993 as filed in the writ petition contained only the first page of the bill bearing a foot note forming part of the bill and the remaining portion was not on the record. It was the case of the petitioner that only the said first page of the bill was received and the accompanying pages were not delivered to the petitioner. But the said plea was found to be not acceptable by this Court. The Division Bench however, issued a direction to the respondent to deliver to the petitioner duplicate copy of the complete bill with whatever details may be available with it as regards the demand of Rs. 10,96,081.80 and on receipt of the said duplicate copy of the bills and details in accordance with the direction, the petitioner was asked to raise a dispute to the respondent and on the dispute being raised the respondent was directed to take steps for appointment of an Arbitrator. It was also observed that reference of the disputes to the Arbitrator shall be made in consonance with the provisions of Section 7(P) of the Indian Telegraph Act and that the Arbitrator shall render a reasoned award within four months from the date of entering upon the reference and that the admitted amount not forming subject matter of dispute shall be deposited by the petitioner.