FATHINATHAN MICHAEL Vs. TELECOM DISTRICT MANAGER PONDICHERRY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two appeals by the complainant.

(2.) The case of the complainant is as follows: The complainant is a subscriber for telephone facilities in Pondicherry. He received in succession two bills showing number of calls out of proportion to his actual use. From the details of the bills which the Department has provided he has been able to point out that some of the items relating to foreign calls were never been resorted to by the complainant. He has also issued a Lawyer's notice to the Department pointing out those items and requested to appoint an arbitrator as provided under Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act. The Telephone Department did not yield to his request.

(3.) On the basis of the above allegations he filed two separate complaints for two periods in which he asked for revision of bills and compensation for the injury caused.