O P MAHAIAN Vs. GENERAL MANAGER TELEPHONES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Three excessive telephone bills were challenged by the complainant on the ground that during this period, the telephone mostly remained dead and the telephone was misused by the employees of the Telephone Department with connivance with others. The complainant had applied for withdrawal of STD facility and it took 4 years to disconnect the same. Contesting the complaint, the Telephone Department took up the stand that the telephone bills were rightly issued. There was no defect in the meter. The allegation of connivance was denied. STD facility could not be withdrawn on the first application as signatures of the applicant did no tally with the signatures on the official record. Subsequently, when the complainant moved another application, STD facility was promptly withdrawn within two months. On the material produced by the parties, the District Forum vide order dated July 4, 1996 partly allowed the complaint holding deficiency in rendering service on the part of the Telephone Department in not withdrawing the STD facility promptly and awarded a sum of Rs.2500/-as compensation payable to the complainant (Rs.2,000/-towards damages and Rs.500/-as costs) The complainant was otherwise held to pay the entire amount of the three bills/ challenged i. e. Rs.37,815/-. The present is an appeal filed by the complainant, challenging the aforesaid order.

(2.) Alongwith the appeal, an application for condoning delay in filing the same was filed, inter alia asserting that copy of the order of the District Forum was delivered to him on September 3,1996 and on October 1,1996 after he had received salary, he was to visit Chandigarh for filing the appeal that his wife suffered illness, which prevented him from visiting Chandigarh. I On October 10, 1996, he came to Chandigarh after recovery of his wife from the illness and hence he filed the appeal, resulting in delay of seven days. In support of the application, the appellant, O. P. Mahajan filed his own affidavit, Accepting the affidavit of the appellant, there is found to be sufficient reason, which prevented the appellant from filing the appeal. The application is, therefore, allowed.

(3.) Since, no appeal has been filed by the Telephone Department against the impugned order, finding of the District Forum that there was deficiency in rendering service in not promptly withdrawing the STD facility and granting compensation on that account is, therefore, affirmed. The only dispute which deserves to be considered is as to how the Telephone Department was expected to deal with the different complaints alleged to have been made by the complainant. During the period in dispute that his telephone remained dead and thus, the telephone bills were excessive are to be deal with. Counsel for the parties have referred to several decisions of the National Commission on the principle governing the determination of such a dispute. A brief reference thereto is considered necessary to decide the case in hand. In 1991, matter came up for consideration before the National Commission in Telecom District Manager, Patna V/s. M/s. Kalyanpur Cement Ltd., 1991 2 CPJ 286 (NC ). It was held that merely on the basis of suspicion, the telephone bills could not be set aside, being excessive. There has to be material or evidence indicating collusion with the employees of the Telephone Department in tampering or manipulating the metering equipment that such excessive bills could be quashed. In para 4 of the judgment, it was observed as under : "there is no evidence to show that the metering equipment was defective or that it had been tampered with or manipulated so as to inflate the bills. It is also not correct to assume that there has to be pattern of making telephone calls from a telephone; the number of telephone calls made by a subscriber can fluctuate considerably for many reasons. The subscriber in this particular case, the consumer is commercial concern and there is every likelihood that the telephone calls in a period of time may fluctuate widely. It may become necessary to make a fair and just determination of the calls made on the basis of the calling pattern over a period of time, only if it is established that the metering equipment is defective, or has been tampered with or manipulated, resulting in the bill being inflated. It is true that one cannot altogether rule out the possibility of such tampering or manipulation of metering equipment and the consumer must be protected against such malpractices. It is, however, not open to the Consumer Forums to base a finding of me bills having been inflated merely on the basis of suspicion and it will be not right to assume that there was something wrong with the mechanism without evidence and without identifying the precise defect in that mechanism. "