Complainant/petitioner took a mobile connection from the respondent.  Allegedly for obtaining the connection she deposited Rs.5,000/- along with 12 post dated cheques of Rs.1800/- each.  One of the cheques of Rs.1800/- was dishonored and the respondent deactivated the connection of the complainant.  Aggrieved by this complainant filed the complaint before the District Forum.

-2-

          District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.1 Lac by way of compensation to the petitioner.

          Respondent filed the appeal before the State Commission which allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the District Forum.  It was held that the respondent was justified in deactivating the telephone as the cheque issued by the petitioner had been dishonored.

          Supreme Court of India in “General Manager, Telecom vs. M. Krishnan & Anr. – 2009 (12) SCALE 123” has held that the consumer fora under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 do not have the jurisdiction to decide the disputes regarding  telephone bills.  Para 6 and 7 of the aforesaid judgement read as under :

“6.    In our opinion when there is a special remedy provided in Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act regarding disputes in respect of telephone bills, then the remedy under the Consumer Protection Act is by implication barred. Section 7B of the Telegraph Act reads as under:

Section 7B Arbitration of Disputes:

(1)    Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, if any dispute concerning any telegraph line, appliance or apparatus arises between the telegraph authority and the person or whose benefit the line, appliance or apparatus is, or has been provided, the dispute shall be determined by arbitration and shall, for the purpose of such determination, be referred to an arbitrator appointed by the Central Government either specifically for the determination of that dispute or generally for the determination of disputes under this Section.

(2)    The award of the arbitrator appointed under Sub-section (1) shall be conclusive between the parties to the dispute and shall not be questioned in any Court.

Rule 413 of the Telegraph Rules provides that all services relating to telephone are subject to Telegraph Rules. A telephone connection can be disconnected by the Telegraph Authority for default of payment under Rule 443 of the Rules.

7.     It is well settled that the special law overrides the general law. Hence, in our opinion the High Court was not correct in its approach.”

          In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in M. Krishnan’s case (supra), this revision petition is dismissed. 

          Petitioner, if so advised, would be at liberty to seek relief from any other Forum along with an application under Section 14 of the

-4-

Indian Limitation Act for condoning the delay for the time spent before the consumer fora, keeping in mind the observations made by the Supreme Court in Laxmi Engineering Works vs.PSG Industrial Institute – (1995) 3 SCC 583.