RANBIR SINGH CHAUDHARY Vs. TELECOM DISTRICT MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner here is the original complainant in the District Forum, Kurukshetra. The petitioner filed against the order dated 4.4.2002 of the State Commission, Haryana and the order of the District Forum Kurukshetra dated 24.4.1998.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are: The petitioner Mr. Chaudhary had installed a telephone at his residence 30 years back prior to the disputed bill. A telephone bill of Rs. 8,078/- was issued on 1.8.1994 for the period of 16.5.1994 to 15.7.1994 by the respondents. He filed a complaint demanding for correction of the inflated bill and the respondents did not pay any heed to his complaint. Petitioner filed the complaint on 26.8.1994 in the District Forum, Kurukshetra for the correction of the bill and also for stay against disconnection of the telephone.

(3.) The complaint was allowed vide order dated 2.8.1995 where the operative part of the order is as below: "The opposite party shall prepare two bills, one to include charges which are correctly payable by the subscriber local call being computed to be equal to the average number of calls metered during the six bi-monthly periods (one year) immediately preceding the disputed periods plus 10% over the average. Such a bill is called "split bill". Another bill shall be prepared for the balance and marked as "part local call bill (disputed)". The subscriber shall pay the first bill within 7 days, the opposite party is directed not to insist on the payment of the second bill till final decision is taken on the complaint lodged by subscriber after making proper investigation on the lines indicated in the Manual and in the Circular."