TELEPHONE DISTRICT ENGINEER Vs. KRISHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Telecommunication Department has come up in appeal against the order of the learned District Forum, Jind, whereby complaint has been partly allowed, amount of the bill in dispute has been reduced and S. T. D. facility provided to the telephone of the complainant has been directed to be disconnected.

(2.) Krishan Lal complainant approached the District Forum, Jind for the reduction of the amount of two bills received by him from the telephone department, dated 1st July, 1993 for Rs.2145/- and 1st of November, 1993 for Rs.3227/-, on the ground that the same were excessive due to clear spurt in the meter or technical fault in the meter or some misuse by the telephone department. The opposite party however justified the issuance of the bills on the ground that the same were based on the actual consumption. After examination of the documentary evidence, the learned District Forum came to the conclusion, that so far as the 1st bill dated 1st of July, 1993 was concerned, no fault could be found therewith; hence the complaint regarding the same was dismissed. However, so far as the 2nd bill dated 1st of November, 1993 is concerned, the learned District Forum came to the conclusion that the consumption shown therein was certainly excessive and after reducing the number of calls from 2760 to 2100, directed the telephone department to issue fresh bill for the reduced amount. It has also been directed that the S. T. D facility attached to the phone of the complainant should be disconnected forthwith, as prayed by him long ago.

(3.) In the appeal before us, the learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that the learned District Forum should not have reduced the amount of the bill by taking into consideration the amount of the bills relating to the past period. We do not agree with the contention of the learned Counsel, inasmuch as, it is not a case where the bill has been reduced by the District Forum by taking into consideration the average basis for the past period. On the other hand, the firm conclusion is that the excessive billing was obviously due to spurt in the meter and defect in the equipment. Further, when the complainant had been requesting the department for disconnection of S. T. D. , the same should have been disconnected long ago, as he was apprehending misuse of the same by the telephone department. In the circumstances, we do not find any ground to interfere in the order of the learned District Forum, especially when the number of calls reduced in the disputed bill are only 660 i. e. from 2760 to 2100. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.