This is a complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying for an order directing the O.P./ BSNL to refund Rs.1,093/- to the complainant which was illegally deducted from security deposit of Rs.1,440/- and also for compensation of Rs.10,000/- for mental harassment.
The complaint case in short is that he had a land line telephone connection in his residence at Chanditala, Raiganj being phone No. 03523-253525 of BSNL. The connection was out of order from 30.04.2013 and he informed the BSNL Authority on 13.05.2013 to repair the same, but for about 6 months the BSNL office did not response to repair the telephone connection therefore he had no other alternative but to surrender the land line connection in the office on 22.12.2013 after a long wait of 6/7 months. Though the connection was not functioning from May’13, he had been receiving telephone bills month by month asking him to pay the charges. Lastly, after surrender of the telephone connection, he was refunded Rs.347/- by a cheque, dated 20.08.2015 and the telephone charges for the bills showing total Rs.1,093/- has been deducted from the security deposit of Rs.1,440/-. The petitioner submitted complaint as to why without repair of the telephone line he had been served with monthly telephone bills regularly and why the money was deducted from his security deposit for the defective period of the bill. Therefore the complainant files this case before this Forum against O.P./ BSNL for its negligence and deficiency in service and illegally causing him irreparable loss along with mental harassment.
On the other hand O.P. contested this case by filing written version praying for dismissal of this case along with other grounds categorically denying the allegations of the complainant. O.P. stated that the telephone of the complainant was in disorder for the time being and as soon as O.P. was informed the Department repaired the defect and reconnected the line as usual, therefore, the petitioner has to pay rental charges of the telephone connection before his surrender on 23.12.2012 as per terms and conditions of the Department. The telephone bills were issued month by month accordingly upon the petitioner and a total Rs.l,093 was charged for non-payment of previous bills and it was deducted from his security deposit money of Rs.1,440/-. The remaining amount payable by the O.P. Rs.347/- was paid by cheque to the petitioner after the surrender of telephone connection and as soon as the petitioner received the amount. There is no relationship of consumer with the petitioner and this case is not maintainable in this Forum.
To establish the case, the complainant has relied upon affidavit-in-chief sworn in by him as P.W.-1 and relied upon some documents. O.P. also cross examined the petitioner, but O.P. did not adduce any evidence.
DECISIONS WITH REASONS
Giving due consideration to the contents of the complaint petition, documentary evidence on record, hearing, arguments advanced by the lawyers of both sides, the Ld Forum has come to the findings as follows: -
Admittedly the telephone connection of the petitioner was not in order from 30.04.2013 and the information to that effect was received by the O.P. on 13.05.2013. Petitioner alleges that O.P. did not take any steps to correct the defect and resumed the connection. O.P./ BSNL however denies these facts. On the other hand O.P. claims that the line was temporarily out of order and within a short period the defect was cured and the complainant was given the proper service. But from the telephone bill for the period May’13 and afterwards it is clear that there was no usage of the telephone service and therefore no usage charges was shown on those bills up to the period Dec’13 and instead only monthly charges or fixed monthly rental was charged up to the period Dec’13. No monthly charges were shown for the bill Jan’14 to Nov’14. Admittedly, the telephone was surrendered by the petitioner to the O.P. on 22.12.2014. The non-service period is from 16.05.2013 to 10.12.2014 as per Note of SDE (T). Therefore, O.P. cannot claim any charge from the petitioner as usage or rental of the telephone line from 16.05.2013 to 10.12.2014 when the telephone connection was not in order.
Complainant has been able to prove that the telephone was not in order and he was not using the same from May’13. Therefore, the monthly charges amounting to Rs.1,092/- up to the period Dec’13 realized by the O.P. from the petitioner after deducting the amount from the security deposit of Rs.1,440/-, which is unreasonable and not fair. The O.P. was negligent in removing the defect of the telephone connection and failed to give service to the consumer after May’13 in spite of his repeated request. Therefore the petitioner has been able to prove this fact. In despair the petitioner has to surrender the telephone connection after a long wait of 6 – 7 months, causing him serious inconvenience and mental agony. Moreover, by deducting the fixed monthly charges amounting to Rs.1,093/- from the security deposit without giving any service must have caused financial loss to the complainant, which he could not use the telephone after 30.04.2013 till his surrender.
The petitioner filed the copies of the last telephone bill paid by him for the period 01.03.2013 to 30.04.2013 and the payment was made of Rs.310/- on 24.05.2013, there was no outstanding due. He also filed the successive bills from May’13 to Oct’14. Copy of letter of intimation regarding non-functioning of telephone from 30.04.2013, the letter dated 13.05.2013 received by the O.P., the permanent closing of land connection along with handed over the telephone set on 22.12.2014, Note of SDE (T), BSNL, that letter of rent rebate/ 2014-2015/49, dated 09.12.2014, TRA Received on 12.12.2014 of the telephone No. Rnj-253525, the non service period shown from 16.05.2013 to 10.12.2014. The copy of letter, dated 28.01.2015 to TDM, BSNL, Raiganj praying for weaving of the charges of bill amount of telephone bill for the period of non-functioning of the telephone and for refund of security deposit. The cheque of Rs.347/- of Union Bank in his favour.
We have gone through the complaint petition, written version and the documents filed by the complainant we have also gone through the evidence of the P.W.-1, complainant has been able to prove by sufficient evidence oral and documentary that he could not use the telephone from 30.04.2013. He paid all the charges of telephone bill up to 30.04.2013. As the petitioner has been able to prove his case by providing the copy of Permanent Closing of Land Connection dated 22.12.2014, he is entitled to the refund of the said security deposit, as he has already surrendered the telephone to the O.Ps. following all the formalities in prescribed form addressed to the SDE/ JTO, Raiganj Telephone Exchange proves the same. He also prayed for refund in writing. On perusal of those documents and after hearing the Ld. Lawyers of both sides this Forum finds that the complainant has been able to prove his case successfully. That, the O.P./ BSNL is very much deficient and negligent in service as they failed to release the total security deposit of Rs.1,440/- instead paid only Rs.347/- after deducting Rs.1,093/- unreasonably. As a result the case succeeds.
Fees paid is correct.
Hence, it is
ORDERED,
That the case being No.CC - 10/2016 is allowed on contest but in part against O.P./ BSNL.
O.Ps. is directed to pay Rs.1,093/- towards the remaining part of security deposit to the petitioner. O.P. further directed to pay a compensation of Rs.1,000/- for harassment and mental pain and agony to the complainant and a litigation cost of Rs.500/- total Rs.2,593/- within one month from this date, failing which the awarded amount will carry interest @ 9% p.a. till full realization; otherwise the complainant will be at liberty to realize his claim in accordance with law.
Copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.
