GOKULANAND SAHAY Vs. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was the complainant before the District Forum, where he had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondents.

(2.) Very briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioner/complainant had challenged the bills issued by the respondent being excessive, charging meter rent when it was not in use, causing harassment to him. The District Forum after hearing the parties, directed that the respondent shall issue bills on the average of previous six months bill beyond 15.5.1999 and the complainant shall pay the aforesaid revised bill within one month. The petitioner was also given rental rebate for the period the telephone was dead. Against that an appeal was filed by the respondent which was dismissed on the ground that in view of the provisions of Section 7(B) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, matter needs to be referred to arbitration. Aggrieved by this order, this revision petition has been filed before us.

(3.) We heard the petitioner who appeared in person and by profession an Advocate. Section 7(B) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 reads as follows: