CONSUMER CASE NO:- 09/2020
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
The case of the complainant, in brief, is that complainant is a designated senior Advocate as well as the Chairman of the Silchar Municipal Board, Silchar. That the complainant has his land line telephone connection bearing no.-03842-266089 and had postpaid mobile phone connection bearing no.-9435522735. Both the phone connections are of great importance and value for the complainant and as such he has been enjoying the facility on payment of monthly rent regularly since many years. That since some time past the complainant was not receiving any bill for his aforesaid two phone connections and as a result he could not make payment of the bills. When enquired in the office of the BSNL then the complainant was told that issue of paper bill has been stopped since April’2019. The complainant then brought the matter of non-issuance of paper bills to the higher authority. Subsequently the complainant received a copy of letter written by the Dy. General Manager (Fin) IFA, Assam addressed to the Dy. General Manager (T&C) CFA, New Delhi stating that printing of monthly bills through vendors under CFA vertical has been stopped from April’ 2019 onwards for cases where consent of the customers have so far been received. The complainant has further stated that on 04/09/2019 he wrote a letter to the Accounts Officer, BSNL, Silchar, asking him to inform when and from whom such consent was taken . But immediately after the said letter of the complainant both the land line and mobile telephone line of the complainant were disconnected. Then on 16/09/2019 a letter was written asking for the reasons of disconnection. Thereafter though the BSNL authority, Silchar restored the land line connection but curiously after short interval the line was again disconnected. The BSNl authority then informed that landline disconnection is fully automatic by system which happens when customer delays payments even after due date. According to the complainant, he requested the Accounts Officer, BSNL, Silchar to send the bills so that payments can be made . As no bill was sent so payments could not be made and as a result of which his telephone line was disconnected. He also never gave his consent for stopping paper bills and the O.Ps. by not sending paper bills has caused deficiency in service. He also suffered mental agony for the intentional disservice. The complainant has , therefore, prayed for passing an award of Rs. 70,000/- as compensation, an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards cost of the suit etc.
Only the Opposite Party No.-2 filed written statement stating, interalia, that there is no cause of action of the case, that the case is not maintainable in its present form and manner, that the complaint is barred by limitation etc. etc. It is stated that the Government of India stressed for implementation of new system of sending bills through e-mail and messages to materialise the concept of digital India. It has been further stated that the complainant has updated his e-mail id with the office of the O.Ps. in respect of his landline connection as well as mobile connection so that the bills could be sent through E-mail. Since the complainant has updated his E-mail ID with the office of the O.P. in respect of his said phones so it is implied that he accepted the mode of sending bills through E-mail to him by the O.Ps. in place of paper bills. According to the contesting O.P. the complainant had full knowledge about his outstanding due bills but he intentionally did not pay the bills. It is stated that there was no negligence or disservice or illegal trade practice on the part of the O.Ps. As such the O.P. has prayed for dismissal of the case.
In support of the case the complainant has submitted his evidence on affidavit as PW-1 and has also exhibited some documents. On the other hand, no any evidence has been adduced by the O.Ps. Perused the entire evidence on record including the written argument submitted by the complainant. Let us now appreciate the evidence below.
In his evidence PW-1 , the complainant, has reiterated the same facts as stated by him in his complaint petition. It reveals from the evidence of PW-1 that he did not receive the paper bill of his landline and Mobile connections from the local office of the Opposite Party BSNL and as a result he could not pay the bill amount and both his phone connections were disconnected. The case record further goes to show that on being compelled due to said disconnection PW-1 later on abandoned his BSNL mobile connection. So now in the present case the main point in dispute is that the O.P. did not serve paper bill of the landline connection of the complainant for which the bill amount could not be paid resulting disconnection of the said landline. According to PW-1, he suffered a lot due to said disconnection. It is not disputed in the case that the complainant has got a landline connection for which paper bill was not submitted and due to non-payment of the charges accrued for the period the line was disconnected. According to the O.P. they sent the bill through the e-mail updated by the complainant and the said new method of sending the bill through e-mail was adopted to materialise the concept of digital India slogan of the Govt. of India. Further statement of O.P. No.-2 is that from the updation of his e-mail by the complainant with the office of O.Ps. in respect of his phone it implies that he accepted the mode of sending bills through e-mail to him by the O.Ps. in place of paper bills.
Now turning our attention to the evidence of PW-1 we find that PW-1 in his evidence has categorically stated that he never gave his consent for stopping paper bills. On the other hand, from Ext.-8 letter issued by the Dy. General Manager(Fin)/IFA, Assam Telecom Circle, Guwahati, copy of which was sent to the complainant it reveals that printing of monthly bills through vendors under CFA vertical has been able to stop from April’2019 onwards for cases where consent of the customers have so far been received. This Ext.-8 is, however, not in dispute in this case. So it is clear from Ext-8 that issuance of paper bill can be stopped and in its place bills can be sent through e-mail and messages only in respect of the customers who have given their consent. The complainant has totally denied the fact that he gave any such consent for sending his bills through e-mail. The O.Ps have also failed to submit any scratch of paper to show that the complainant gave specific written consent for sending his bills through his e-mail. On the other hand, from the simple mentioning of e-mail i/d in any paper without any specific declaration can not lead any authority to presume that consent has been given for sending the bills through e-mail by stopping paper bills. That being the position, the alleged disconnection of the landline connection of the complainant by the O.Ps. without sending the paper bills can be said to be improper and unjust and this shows disservice of the O.Ps. towards the complainant. We also find no ground to disbelieve the claim of the complainant that due to dissconnection of his phone connection he suffered a lot.
In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case we are of the considered opinion that the complainant is entitled to get relief in the case. Considering all matters we believe that a token compensation in this case will meet the ends of justice. So, it is ordered that the O.P. No.-2 shall pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.1,000/- ( Rupees one thousand) only towards compensation and an amount of Rs.3,000/- ( Rupees three thousand) only towards cost of litigation. It is further ordered that the entire amount shall be payable within a period of next 90(ninety) days else interest @ 7% per annum would be accrued on the entire amount from the date of judgment till realisation of the amount. With the above the case stands allowed on contest against the O.P. No.-2 and exparte against other O.Ps.
The judgment is delivered on this 11th day of November with our seal and signature.
