This appeal by Opposite parties is directed against the order dated 16.7.2010 passed by District Consumer Forum-II, U.T. Chandigarh whereby complaint bearing No.1430 of 2009 of respondent /complainant was allowed with costs of Rs.5000/- and appellants/OPs were directed to restore the mobile connection of the complainant immediately on receipt of certified copy of the order. OPs were also directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the complainant for mental agony and harassment. The order with regard to payment was directed to be complied with within 30 days from the date of receipt of its copy, failing which OPs were made liable to pay penal interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of complaint i.e. 6.11.2009 till its realization. 2. The parties hereinafter shall be referred to as per their status before the District Consumer Forum. 3. In nutshell, the facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant was subscriber of mobile connection No.9888883366. He had received bill for Rs.468.78P for the month of August, 2009 which was paid to OPs vide receipt No.CR2-1782 dated 07.09.2009 but inspite of making payment, his mobile connection had been disconnected. He visited the office of OPs a number of times to get the connection restored but to no effect. Complainant then wrote letter on 25.9.2009 requesting OPs to restore the connection but all his efforts could not get any tangible result, hence he filed complaint before the District Forum seeking direction to OPs to restore the connection and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony. 4. On the other hand, OPs contested the complaint before the District and filed reply inter-alia stating therein that the complainant did not pay the bill amounting to Rs.468.78 P and a total sum of Rs.1093/- as usage charges was pending against him and as such Ops had a right to deactivate the connection for non-payment of outstanding dues. It was pleaded that the remedy under Consumer Protection Act was barred as there was special remedy provided in Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act regarding disputes in respect of telephone bills. Pleading that there was no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer for dismissal of the complaint was made by OPs. 5. The District Consumer Forum after going through the evidence and hearing the counsel for parties allowed the complaint as indicated in the opening part of this judgment. Aggrieved against the said order, opposite parties have come up in this appeal. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the file carefully. At the very outset, the learned counsel for Vodafone Essar South Ltd. - Opposite party submitted that the District Fora under the Consumer Protection Act had no jurisdiction to try and decide the dispute between the telecom service provider and its subscriber as such matters against telecommunication services are not maintainable in view of judgment of Hon’ble Apex court in General Manager, Telecom Vs M.Krishnan & another (2009) 8 SCC 481. Against this submission and observations made in the above stated ruling, complainant could not show any law . Thus, we have no option but to hold that the Fora under the Consumer Protection Act,1986 have no jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon such disputes of telecommunication services as it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme court in above said ruling that there is implied bar to invoke the provisions of Consumer Protection Act in view of Section-7B of the Indian Telegraph Act and any dispute between the subscriber and the telegraph authority can be resolved by taking recourse to arbitration proceedings. In another case of mobile connection titled Prakash Verma Vs Idea Cellular Ltd. & Anr. (Revision Petition No.1703 of 2010) the Hon’ble National Commission by relying upon the said Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the petition by observing that the Judgment of the Supreme court is binding on all the subordinates courts and there is no scope for interference. 7. Therefore , in view of the law settled by the Apex court in General Manager, Telecom Vs M.Krishnan & another(Supra), the appeal filed by OPs is accepted. Consequently, the impugned order dated 16.7.2010 passed by the District Forum is set aside and complaint is dismissed being not maintainable in the Fora. 8. Before parting with this order, it is observed that complainant would be at liberty to knock at the door of the appropriate Forum having jurisdiction over the matter, in accordance with law. Certified Copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge. The file be consigned to record room.
| | HON'BLE MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER | HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT | , | | 
