TELECOM DISTRICT MANAGER PANAJI Vs. MRS LIBERATA FERNANDES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE District Forum as well as the State Commission have acted contrary to the dictum laid down by this Commission reported in 1(1991) CPJ 48 � The District Manager, Telephones & Ors. v. Niti Saran, and several subsequent cases, wherein that decision has been uniformly followed that it is illegal on the part of an adjudicating authority under the Consumer Protection Act to adopt the average of the number of calls made by a consumer during any particular period prior to the billing period in dispute for determining whether a disputed bill was excessive or not.

(2.) IT has been pointed out by this Commission that when it is alleged by a Consumer that a bill served on him is excessive and that it is the outcome of some defect in the metering system or the consequence of unauthorized tampering with his telephone line by someone, either in the employ of the Department or some outsider, an investigation into the said matter has to be conducted by the Forum concerned and a finding on the question has to be recorded on the basis of evidence adduced by the parties during such investigation. This principle has been completely ignored by the State Commission and the District Forum while passing the impugned orders with the result that the orders passed by them cannot be sustained in law.