MUKESH KUMAR TAYAL Vs. TELECOM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 directed against the order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Surguja, (hereinafter referred to as the District Forum) in Complaint No. 195/2004 dismissing the complaint,

(2.) Grievance of the Appellant-Complainant is that he is a subscriber to phone No. 23443 allotted on 8.4.1998. It is further stated that the bills were being paid regularly however his phone was disconnected in June, 2001 on alleged non-payment of bills for the period intervening 1.6.1994 to 11.12.2000 and was not restored despite several requests. Compensation for Rs. 10,000 and damages at Rs. 50 per day have been claimed.

(3.) OPs in reply have stated that the service to the said phone connection was withdrawn on 21.3.2001 for non-payment of three bills for Rs. 373, Rs. 562 and Rs. 89. Later after payment of the above bills the connection was restored. Again disconnection of the said phone was resorted to on 26.6.2001 for non-payment of bills dated 11.4.2001 and 11.6.2001 for Rs. 938 and Rs. 694 respectively. It is also stated that necessary telephonic intimation regarding outstanding bills was given to the appellant-complainant. It is denied that the bill for Rs. 2,802 was issued by the OPs.