Order No. 15 dt. 09/08/2018
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant obtained telephone connection from BSNL, o.p.1 being no.033-22873826. The said landline is installed at the residence of the complainant at 55A, Dilkhusa Street, Kolkata-700017. Since October,2014 the o.p.1 failed to provide any service to the complainant and the complainant lodged various complaints but no action was taken by the o.p.1. The o.p.1 sent telephone bills and the same were paid by the complainant till the month of April, 2017. The complainant repeatedly requested the o.p.1 for restoring the telephone connection but the o.p.1 did not pay any heed for which the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps to restore the service of the complainant’s landline and to pay compensation of Rs.40,000/- and further demanded the amount of Rs.5,800/- obtained from the complainant during the period of non-functioning of the said landline.
The o.ps contested the case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that the complainant applied for landline service which was installed on 07.09.2011 under general plan Rs.240/- p.m since 2011 to till September, 2014 the line was in order and there was no complaint from the side of the complainant. The complainant has claimed that the trouble cropped up in the month of October,2014. In order to substantiate the said allegation the complainant could not file any document to show that he lodged any complaint after the disturbance occurred in respect of the said telephone connection. The complainant cannot file any document to show that he obtained any docket number after lodging the complaint. The complainant has fictitiously made such allegation against the o.ps and in order to have the illegal gain filed this case. Accordingly the o.ps prayed for dismissal of the case.
On the basis of the pleadings of the respective parties following points are to be decided :-
- Whether the complainant obtained the telephone connection from the o.p.1?
- Whether the said connection gave any problem to the complainant?
- Whether the complainant lodged any complaint to the o.ps?
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons :
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. Lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant obtained telephone connection from BSNL, o.p.1 being no.033-22873826. The said landline is installed at the residence of the complainant at 55A, Dilkhusa Street, Kolkata-700017. Since October,2014 the o.p.1 failed to provide any service to the complainant and the complainant lodged various complaints but no action was taken by the o.p.1. The o.p.1 sent telephone bills and the same were paid by the complainant till the month of April, 2017. The complainant repeatedly requested the o.p.1 for restoring the telephone connection but the o.p.1 did not pay any heed for which the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps to restore the service of the complainant’s landline and to pay compensation of Rs.40,000/- and further demanded the amount of Rs.5,800/- obtained from the complainant during the period of non-functioning of the said landline.
Ld. Lawyer for the o.p.s argued that the complainant applied for landline service which was installed on 07.09.2011 under general plan Rs.240/- p.m since 2011 to till September, 2014 the line was in order and there was no complaint from the side of the complainant. The complainant has claimed that the trouble cropped up in the month of October,2014. In order to substantiate the said allegation the complainant could not file any document to show that he lodged any complaint after the disturbance occurred in respect of the said telephone connection. The complainant cannot file any document to show that he obtained any docket number after lodging the complaint. The complainant has fictitiously made such allegation against the o.ps and in order to have the illegal gain filed this case. Accordingly the o.ps prayed for dismissal of the case.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainant obtained telephone connection from the o.p.1 The complainant has claimed that he paid the entire telephone bills but he did not get any service from the said telephone. In order to substantiate his claim the complainant could not file any document to show that he lodged any complaint to the concerned authority highlighting the fact that the telephone was not functioning. It is hardly believable that a subscriber would go on paying the telephone charges without obtaining any service from the said telephone connection. The complainant is a businessman and whenever he found that the telephone was not functioning he ought to have brought to the notice of the o.ps but he failed to produce any document to that effect. The complainant has stated that he paid the telephone charges upto the month of April, 2017 but the complainant failed to state as to why he stopped payment if there would have been any disturbance in the line and the complainant would have lodged his complaint the o.ps would not have raised any bill during that period. Be that as it may since the complainant has claimed that he failed to get any service therefore, a necessary direction is to be given to the o.ps to check the telephone connection of the o.ps and if there is any disturbance in the line the same is to be removed and the connection is to be restored provided the complainant pays the outstanding dues to the o.ps.
Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, it is ordered,
that the case no.240/2017 is allowed on contest without cost against the o.ps. The o.ps are jointly and/or severally directed to check the telephone line of the complainant and by removing the defect if any and restore the connection provided the complainant pays all the outstanding dues to the o.ps.
