BHARTI AIRTEL LTD Vs. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein is the opposite party in C.C No.567/ 2010 before the 1st respondent Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. The 2nd respondent is the complainant. Even though notice has been ordered to the 2nd respondent, there is no appearance. The complaint filed by the 2nd respondent is produced as Ext.P1 and the allegation is one of deficiency in service in relation to the disconnection of a telephone and compensation is claimed. Ext.P2 is the version submitted by the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner filed Ext.P3, I.A.No.202/ 2010 as an objection to the maintainability of the complaint before the Forum as it relates to the telephone bill.

(2.) RELIANCE is placed on the judgment of the Apex Court in General Manager, Telecom vs. M. Krishnan (2009 (3) KLT 991 (SC)). The petitioner has pointed out in the writ petition that the matter is being adjourned from time to time and finally by Ext.P4, the Forum decided that the question of maintainability is to be kept in abeyance.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY, Ext.P4 is quashed. There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to consider I.A.No.202/2010 (Ext.P3) on merits and pass appropriate orders within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that I have not expressed anything on the merits of the matter. This writ petition is disposed of as above.