SMT.SURENDRABALA SANGHI Vs. THE GENERAL MANAGER, TELEPHONES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order dated 29.06.2006 of AP Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad dismissing appeal against the order dated 07.09.2001 of a District Forum whereby complaint filed by the petitioner was dismissed.

(2.) Petitioner was having temporary connection bearing No. 556630 which was converted into OYT w.e.f. 21.06.1993. Petitioner received bill Ex. A -1 dated 1.1.94 for the period 21.6.1993 to 15.12.1993 for Rs. 11,723/. He also received bill Ex. A -2 dated 1.3.1994 from 15.12.1993 to 15.2.1994 for Rs. 3,435/ -. Petitioner denied of the making of alleged STD and ISD calls from the said telephone. On these two abnormal bills not being corrected despite protest, the petitioner filed complaint which was contested by the respondent/opposite party by filing written version on the affidavit of M.P. Murarji Rao, the then Assistant Manager (Legal -II). It was stated that telephone No. 556630 was provided with STD/ISD facility without dynamic locking. In para No. 7 it was stated that on receiving complaint(s) from the petitioner thorough investigation of both the external and internal equipments were done and no malfunctioning or abnormality was detected therein. Usage of ISD was seen from the records obtained from the special equipment which was existing in the exchange to record the details of the calls made on limited lines for short periods. Result of investigation was communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 25.08.1994. Telephone No. 556630 was changed to 594630 on 07.04.1994. It was asserted that the bills are based on actual consumption.

(3.) Both the Fora below have disbelieved the petitioner of his having not availed of STD/ISD facility from telephone No. 556630.