Kerala

Idukki

CC/09/187

Jayadevan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Accounts officer - Opp.Party(s)

Adv.Biju Vasudevan

30 Oct 2009

ORDER


CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKIConsumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Idukki, Kuyilimala, Painavu PO-685603
Complaint Case No. CC/09/187
1. JayadevanAlukunnel(H), Mariyapuram P.OIdukkiKerala ...........Appellant(s)

Versus.
1. Accounts officerTelecom Revenue Acconts, Jyothi Super Bazar,ThodupuzhaIdukkiKerala2. Deputy TahsildarNedumkandamIdukkiKerala ...........Respondent(s)



BEFORE:
HONORABLE Laiju Ramakrishnan ,PRESIDENTHONORABLE Sheela Jacob ,MemberHONORABLE Bindu Soman ,Member
PRESENT :

Dated : 30 Oct 2009
JUDGEMENT

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 30th day of October, 2009


 

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER

SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER


 

C.C No.187/2009

Between

Complainant : A.V.Jayadevan,

Alukunnel House,

Mariyapuram P.O,

Idukki District.

(By Adv: Biju Vasudevan)

And

Opposite Parties : 1. The Accounts Officer,

(BSNL TR – III) Telecom,

Revenue Accounts,

Jyothi Super Bazar,

Thodupuzha.

2. The Deputy Tahsildar,

Nedumkandam,

Idukki District.

 

O R D E R

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)


 

Complainant absent. No representation. Opposite party appeared directly and submitted that the case is not maintainable as per the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.The copy of the order from the Hon'ble Supreme Court is produced. As per the order from theHon'ble Supreme Court, there is a special remedy provided in Section 7-B of the Indian Telegraph Act, regarding the disputes in respect of telephone bills, then the remedy under the Consumer Protection Act is by implication barred. Hence the complainant can approach the appropriate authority which is the arbitration appointed as per the Telegraph Act.
 

Hence the petition dismissed. One month time is given for the compainant for appearing before the arbitration, till that further proceedings against the complainant by the opposite party may be kept in abeyance.

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 30th day of October, 2009

Sd/-

SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)

Sd/-

SMT. SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER)

Sd/-

SMT. BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)

 


HONORABLE Sheela Jacob, MemberHONORABLE Laiju Ramakrishnan, PRESIDENTHONORABLE Bindu Soman, Member