Per Mr S M Shembole, Hon’ble Presiding Member
Adv.Mr G N Akolkar for the appellant is present. However, None for respondent is present. Its counsel Mr Kadu is also absent. However, Proxy Mr W D Mahore appeared for Adv.Kadu and filed authority letter. Adv. Mr G N Akolkar for the appellant and Proxy Adv.Mr W D Mahore for Adv. Mr Kadu, appearing for respondent, are present.
This appeal is an exception to the judgement & order dtd. 27.06.2001 passed by District Consumer Forum, Amravati partly allowing the complaint bearing No.CC/00/149.
The matter was listed today for hearing before admission. However, with the consent of both the parties, we have decided to hear and dispose of the appeal finally.
Brief facts giving rise to this application are:-
1. The appellant / complainant - Suresh who is from Belora, Tah. Daryapur, District Amravati had applied to respondent – BSNL for Telephone Connection. An application dtd. 26.02.1996 was given to the respondent / o.p. and at the same time necessary charges at Rs.1,000/- were deposited. However, respondent / o.p. could not supply the telephone connection but by letter dtd. 11.11.1997 the applicant was informed that for want of store material and other technical difficulties the connection cannot be given at least for a minimum period of one year. Thereafter the complainant waited for four years. During that period the complainant visited to the office of respondent for several times and requested to supply telephone connection. But according to the appellant / complainant no response was given. Therefore, on 30.05.2000 the complaint was lodged before the District Consumer Forum, Amravati.
2. In response to the notice, respondent / o.p. appeared before the District Consumer Forum and resisted the complaint by filing Written Version, contending, inter alia, that the telephone connection could not be supplied for want of store material and further the other applicants from the same village, had not deposited the necessary charges, etc.
3. On hearing both the sides, the District Forum, Amravati partly allowed the complaint, directing the o.p. BSNL to provide telephone connection within 45 days and further awarded Rs.500/- towards compensation for mental torture and Rs.500/- towards cost of proceedings.
4. Being not satisfied with the impugned order, complainant has filed this appeal, claiming enhancement in compensation, etc.
5. We heard Ld. Counsel for both the sides and perused the impugned copy of judgement & order, copy of appeal memo.
6. Undisputed facts are that the telephone connection was not supplied to the complainant for about 4 years after depositing the necessary charges by him. The telephone connection was given to the complainant pending the complaint but before the final impugned judgement & order.
7. Further it is not disputed that the other persons from the same village had applied for telephone connection but they had not deposited the necessary charges. By letter dtd. 11.11.1997 the appellant / complainant was informed by the respondent / o.p. that for want of store material and other technical difficulties, it will take minimum period of one year, etc. for supplying the telephone connection.
8. Mr Akolkar, Ld. Counsel for the appellant has submitted that though it was informed by the respondent that minimum period of one year would be required for giving telephone connection, it was not given for about four years. Therefore, complainant / appellant required to visit the office of respondent – BSNL for several time. But no response was given. Not only this, but proper treatment was also not given to the complainant and therefore, caused mental torture, etc. According to him, considering the facts, the compensation as well as cost of the proceedings awarded by the District Consumer Forum is not adequate.
9. Per contra, the proxy Adv.Mahore appeared on behalf of Adv. Mr Kadu for respondent, submitted that due to technical difficulties and for want of store material the respondent could not supply the telephone connection till filling the complaint. According to him, the distance between Anjangaon Surji and Belora is more than 30 Kms and for supplying telephone connection for such long distance, adequate store material was not available. Therefore, there was such delay.
10. Mr Mahore Ld. Counsel for the respondent further submitted that though the other persons of same village had applied for telephone connection, they had not deposited requisite charges. In short, according to him there was no fault on the part of officials of the respondent – BSNL.
11. Adv. Mahore further submitted that as soon as the material was available, the telephone connection was supplied to the complainant before passing the impugned judgement & order. However, without considering all these facts, District Consumer Forum, wrongly awarded compensation and cost of proceedings. On this ground, it is submitted to dismiss the appeal.
12. Further, Adv. Mahore, fairly conceded that though the impugned order is not sustainable, the respondent has not challenged it by preferring the appeal.
13. Considering the undisputed facts that the other persons of the same village who had applied for telephone connection, had not deposited the requisite charges & further the store material was not available, it cannot be accepted that there was any fault on the part of officials of the respondent – BSNL. There could be no any intention of the officials of respondent – BSNL in causing much delay for supplying the telephone connection after four years.
14. However, the District Consumer Forum has considered all these facts and awarded minimum compensation, holding that there was mental torture to the complainant as he was required to visit to the office of respondent – BSNL for several time. We find no infirmity or illegality in the impugned judgement & order. The District Consumer Forum, Amravati has rightly awarded adequate compensation. Therefore, no interference is warranted.
15. In the result, the appeal is being devoid of any merit, is liable to be dismissed.
Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
i. Appeal is dismissed.
ii. No order as to cost.
iii. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties.
Delivered on 29.11.2011.
sj
