SAMARESHWAR MAHANTY Vs. CUTTACK TELECOM DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant has filed this appeal challenging the ex parte orders of dismissal dated 25.3.2003 passed by the District Forum in C.D. Case No. 141 of 2002.

(2.) The case of the complainant in brief is that he is a subscriber of telephone whose number has been changed in the meantime several times and at the relevant period, its number was 620297. He is regularly paying Telephone bills and filed the copies of the Telephone bills as per Annexure-1 series. But, he was annoyed when he received notice dated 23.3.2000 (Annexure-2) from the Accounts Officer (TRA) asking him to pay the arrear dues outstanding against him as per the following bills and if already paid then to produce the payment particulars. <FRM>JUDGEMENT_197_CPJ3_2008_1.html</FRM> Out of the aforesaid bills, complainant could not trace out the receipt of payment in respect to the bill Sl. No. 1 and produced the payment receipts in respect to the arrears bills as per Sl. Nos. 2 to 5. The opposite party, therefore, did not demand arrear bill amount as per Sl. Nos. 2 to 5 but demanded amount as per aforesaid Sl. No. 1 as arrear dues. When in spite of payment of dues in time as per Sl. Nos. 2 to 5, dues are shown as arrear in the records of the opposite party, the opposite party should have presumed in absence of any materials with them that no bill amount as per Sl. No. 1 is still outstanding, against the complainant. Had complainant was in arrear of the bill amount under Sl. No. 1 which is of the year 1996, the opposite party would not have spared to disconnect the telephone line to his premises. His telephone line has never been disconnected for non-payment of arrear dues. This amount was never been shown as arrear in subsequent bills during last 3-1/2 years till demand notice in respect to arrear as per Sl. Nos. 1 and 2 was issued to him vide notice dated 20.3.2001 (Annexure-3). Peculiarly enough, arrear dues in respect to bill as per Sl. No. 2 above has been demanded as per Annexure-3 even after complainant satisfied opposite party to have paid the bill amount in respect to that bill. Complainant has filed Annexure-4, the bill payment receipt in respect to Sl. No. 2. Further, when in recent bills for due dates 29.1.2002 and 29.5.2002 (Annexures 5 and 6), arrear bill amount as per Sl. No. 1 is not demanded yet same is demanded without any basis arbitrarily as arrear dues as per a subsequent bill dated 5.7.2002 (Annexure-7). Therefore, complainant filed the C.D. case for a declaration that he is not in arrear of dues amounting to Rupees 3,868 as per Sl. No. 1 Bill No. 93420 dated 11.9.1996 later on demanded again as per Annexure-7 and to prohibit respondent from disconnecting telephone connection to his premises due to non-payment of telephone bills as per aforesaid Sl. Nos. 1 to 5.

(3.) The opposite party has stated as per the written version that only at the time of review of the old outstanding dues in the month of March, 2000, in the book of account, amount of telephone bills as per aforesaid Sl. Nos. 1 to 5 are shown as outstanding on the date of issue of said notice dated 23.3.2000. On receipt of the notice, when complainant produced the particulars in respect to payment of bills as per Sl. Nos. 2 to 5, the outstanding figures under these bills were liquidated. But, as complainant neither produced payment particulars in respect to the bill date 11.9.1996 as per Sl. No. 1 nor paid the arrear dues, said amount is being demanded by the opposite party. His further case is that normally/always arrear bill amount is not reflected or demanded as per subsequent bills. It is only at the time of annual/review, it is brought to the notice of the subscriber. In these end of the view, opposite party prayed to issue suitable direction to the complainant to pay the arrear amount as per bill dated 11.9.1996.