S SEETHARAMAN Vs. TAMIL NADU TELECOMMUNICATIONS OFFICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complaint filed by the appellant before the District Forum against the respondents/opposite parties came to be dismissed on the ground that the matter should be referred to arbitration. We are informed that after the dismissal of the complaint by the District Forum, there was arbitration and in the arbitration proceedings, the complainant had been given favourable orders. Though this is not disputed by the complainant, he wants this Commission to award compensation to him as he was compelled to agitate the issue for several years and had to undergo suffering, hardship, humiliation and incur expenditure by filing the complaint. When pursuant to the order by the District Forum, the matter had gone before the Arbitrator and has also been decided it is not open to the complainant to seek further directions before this Commission.

(2.) The National Commission in a revision petition, R. P. No.659 of 2002 decided on 22.5.2002 upheld the order of the District Forum referring the dispute to arbitration. In another revision petition R. P. No.607 of 1998 decided on 22.11.2000 after the Arbitrator was appointed and had given the award, it was held that the Consumer Fora had no jurisdiction to pass any further orders in the matter and the revision petition was dismissed. The order passed by the Arbitrator is also produced before us. The material portion reads as follows: (1) The excess metering of 4830 units should not be charged in the bill dated 11.1.1997. (2) The telephone was disconnected for non-payment of the disputed bill, which was due to excess metering of 4830 units. Hence the telephone should be restored without collecting the intervening rental from the date of disconnection till reconnection and the reconnection charges.

(3.) In view of what is stated above, nothing survives in the appeal and the same is dismissed. No costs. Appeal dismissed.