MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD Vs. SAIFUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd (hereafter called "mtnl")sues the defendants for a decree in the sum of Rs. 17, 83,056/- with interest at 24% p. a.

(2.) ACCORDING to averments in the plaint, one Smt. Sudesh Vig was subscriber; she had applied for a telephone connection. When the intimation of connection was issued on 27th October, 1994, she was no longer interested in the telephone and wanted to surrender it to the MTNL. It is alleged that before she could surrender the telephone, the second defendant, a phone inspector working for the MTNL at that time, allegedly asked her to get the telephone connection transferred to some interested person; he allegedly offered Rs. 1,000/- to her to do so. The said Smt. Vig allegedly agreed, being a housewife and not familiar with procedures, accepted the offer, and allegedly signed blank papers, transferring the telephone connection to an intending purchaser. At the time, she did not suspect any foul play. The second defendant, after allegedly getting the papers signed from Ms. Sudesh Vig, connived with the first defendant and got the telephone connection installed at the premises being 10756, manakpura, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. This entailed misuse of the blank papers signed by the said Ms. Vig. It is also alleged that though Ms. Vig had applied only for the connection with Subscriber Trunk Dialing (STD), the defendants got the connection converted and changed to STD, and International Subscriber dialling (ISD), for the said connection, i. e No. 3557108. It is also alleged that the telephone connection was used for STD and ISD calls. This led to issuance of three bills by MTNL i. e: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_527_ILRDLH17_2008Html1.htm</FRM>

(3.) THE plaintiff alleges that a notice was issued to Ms. Sudesh Vig to pay the amount of Rs. 17,77,105 on 26-2-1996, concerning the use of the telephone, installed at Manakpura, Karol Bagh; purporting to be aggrieved, she filed a writ petition, No. 998/1996 before this court, saying that the telephone was never installed at her residence and that the second defendant had approached and paid her Rs. 1000 to sign blank papers; according to her, the papers were needed to transfer the telephone connection. After hearing parties, including the MTNL, this court directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the entire facts, by its order dated 14-3-1996. The CBI, after due investigation, recorded a determination of fraud in respect of installation and use of the telephone at Manakpura, Karol Bagh; a first information report (FIR ) was lodged on 15-5-1996 under provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of corruption Act. The criminal case has not yet been decided; it is as yet pending.