TELECOM DISTRICT MANAGER PATNA Vs. M S MUKHERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the District Forum as well as the State Commission have proceeded on the assumption that when a complaint is made by the subscriber of a telephone that a bill served on him is excessive and inflated, the proper test to apply is to take the average number of calls in the previous bills for a given period as the basis for ascertaining what should be fixed as the reasonable number of chargeable calls for the billing period in question. In the judgments rendered by this Commission in Telecom District Manager, Patna v. Kalyanpur Cement Limited (Revision Petition No. 44 of 1990) and in District Manager, Telephones v. Niti Sarin (Revision Petition No. 67 of 1990) reported in 1991 Consumer Protection Judgments 48 we have held that it is not legally permissible to adopt this mode of computation on the basis of average for determining whether a particular bill is excessive or not, except in cases where there is satisfactory evidence to show that there was some material defect in the metering equipment in the departmental exchange concerned.

(2.) IN the light of the principles laid down in these two rulings we set aside the orders of the State Commission and the District Forum and remand the case to the District Forum for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. The District Forum shall afford a further opportunity to both the parties to adduce any additional evidence which they may desire to place before the Forum.