DISTRICT MANAGER TELEPHONES PATNA Vs. LALIT KUMAR BAJLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the light of the decision rendered by us in Revision Petition No. 1 of 1989 "union of INdia (through General Manager, Telecom Jaipur, Telecom District Jaipur), Vs. Nilesh Agarwal, Jaipur" the State Commission was, undoubtedly, right in overruling the preliminary objection raised by the Telecommunication Departtnet that telephone service does not come within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act and that subscribers of telephones are not 'consumers' entitled to seek redress under chapter 3 of the Act. However, we feel that after its having considered the preliminary objections and come to the conclusion that they are devoid of sub-stance, the State Commission should, in the interests of fairness and justice, have given an opportunity to the Opposite Party before it, who had filed only the preliminary objections and had not filed a written statement dealing with the merits of allegation made in the complaint, to file their objections on the merits of the complaint petition. Without affording such an opportunity, the State Commission proceeded to decide the case on the merits, observing that since no objections on merits had been filed, the facts stated in the complaint had to be assumed to be true. We feel that in the circumstances of the case, after the preliminary objections were overruled, the State Commission should have afforded an opportunity to the Opposite Party to file its objections on the merits. Hence, while confirming the State Commission's decision on the preliminary point relating to its jurisdiction, we remand the case to the State Commission for fresh determination on the merits after affording an opportunity to the appellant herein (Opposite Party before the State Commission) to file its written objections on the merits of the complaint petition. The appeal is allowed to the limited extent indicated above and the order passed by the State Commission for payment of compensation will stand set aside. The State Commission will adjudicate upon the case afresh on the merits in the light of what has been stated above. There will be no order as to costs. .