This C.C coming on before us for final hearing, on 22-10-2008 in the presence of Sri. S.Ravinder Reddy, Advocate for Complainant , and in the presence of Sri.P.Amarchand, Advocate for the opposite party ; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing arguments, and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following:-
ORDER
(Per Sri.K.V.Kaladhar, Member )
1. This complaint is filed under section 12(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with the following averments;
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is having Telephone Connection from the year 1994 bearing No.224300 at Aswapuram with S.T.D. as well as I.S.D facility which is very important as the complainant family members, close relatives, friends and known persons have been living in other countries and he has been paying the telephone bills regularly without fail.
3. That the complainant has received a telephone bill dated 6-4-06 in which the opposite party had charged an extra amount of Rs.100/- i.e., Rs.50/- towards FAPI and Rs.50/- towards FADI. Immediately after receiving the bill the complainant had approached the account office of the opposite party to get the clarification in this regard, but he could not give answer and advised the complainant to contact telephone No.223000 of Manuguru telephone exchange, but the said telephone was not at all answered by any one even though the complainant made many phone calls for more than one week.
4. The complainant gave written complaint dated 25-4-06 in this regard to the opposite party by register post, but he did not get any reply. The opposite party is not entitled to claim Rs.100/- without showing proper reason and liable to repay the same amount to the complainant. To the surprise of the complainant I.S.D. facility to his telephone connection was stopped by the opposite party even though the complainant has been paying the bills regularly and the complainant never requested opposite party to stop I.S.D. facility. Moreover the opposite party did not even give any prior notice or information or reason why the I.S.D. facility is stopped to the telephone connection of the complainant. This caused a lot of pain and mental agony to the complainant and to his family members.
5. That due to non availability of I.S.D. connection the complainant could not contact his family members, relatives and other persons who are staying in foreign countries has suffered a lot of inconvenience, which resulted in causing lot of pain and mental agony to the complainant. And the opposite party is liable to pay damages to the complainant.
6. The complainant gave another complaint dated 17-7-2007 by register post to the opposite party and the same was acknowledged by the opposite party on 19-7-2007, but the opposite party paid deaf ear. The complainant has approached the opposite party many times for getting I.S.D. facility to be restored, but the opposite party did not do so.
7. Hence this complaint to direct the opposite party to restore the I.S.D. facility to the telephone connection bearing No.224300 at Aswapuram of the complainant and to return an amount of Rs.100/- that were charged for FAPI and FADI and to award damages to a tune of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and mental agony and to grant costs and to grant any other relief.
8. The complainant filed his affidavit along with the following documents.
ExA1: Telephone bill, dated 6-4-2006. Ex A2: Complaint given to opposite party by the complainant, dated 25-4-2006. Ex A3:Complaint given to opposite party by the complainant, dated 17-7-2006. Ex A4: Postal receipts No.1213 and 2455 with acknowledgement total three.
9. The point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled as prayed for?
10. The notice was served on opposite party on 7-3-07 one Advocate filed vakalath on behalf of opposite party the opposite party took so many adjournments to file counter at last this forum treated as no counter on 4-5-2007. Again the opposite party filed IA.628/2007 to reopen the case to file counter and that was allowed by this forum and in spite of it the opposite party again took several adjournments to file counter at last on 3-7-2008 posted the case to file counter finally even on that day the opposite party did not choose to file counter. Hence this Forum treated that the opposite party has no counter.
11. It is the contention of the complainant that the complainant is having telephone connection from the year 1994 bearing No.224300 at Aswapuram with S.T.D. and I.S.D facility. He received a telephone bill dated 6-4-06 in which the opposite party has charged an extra amount of Rs.100/- i.e.,50/- towards FAPI and Rs.50/- towards FADI. After receiving bill the complainant has approached the account officer of the opposite party to get clarification in this regard but he could not give answer and advised the complainant to contact telephone No.223000 of Manuguru telephone exchange number but the said telephone number was not answered. In this regard the complainant gave a written complaint dated 25-4-2006 and dated 17-7-2006 which were marked as Ex A2 & Ex A3 respectively. In spite of receiving these two notices the opposite party did not give reply and arbitrarily disconnected the I.S.D. facility of the complainant.
12. Even though the opposite party received the notices from this Forum and appointed one Advocate to prosecute the case but the opposite party did not file counter and contest the matter.
13. Hence, we are of the opinion this is a clear case of deficiency in service and negligent attitude on the part of the opposite party. The complainant has a right to know the bill particulars but the opposite party did not furnish the same.
14. Hence, we are of the considered opinion that this is a clear case of deficiency in service and negligence on the part of the opposite party towards the complainant and the complainant is entitled to damages for causing inconvenience by the opposite party.
15. Hence, we direct the opposite party to restore the I.S.D. facility of the complainant forthwith and to pay damages of Rs.500/- towards inconvenience caused to the complainant and also Rs.500/- towards costs of litigation. Accordingly this C.D. is allowed.
Dictated to stenographer, Corrected and pronounced by us, in this Forum on this 30th day of October, 2008.
President Member Member
District Consumers Forum, Khammam
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESS EXAMINED FOR
Complainant Opposite parties
Nil Nil
DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR
Complainant
ExA1: Telephone bill, dated 6-4-2006.
Ex A2: Complaint given to opposite party by the complainant, dated 25-4-2006.
Ex A3:Complaint given to opposite party by the complainant, dated 17-7-2006.
Ex A4: Postal receipts No.1213 and 2455 with acknowledgement total three.
President Member Member District Consumers Forum, Khammam
