KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL No. 828/2015

JUDGMENT DATED: 03.05.2019

(Against the Order in C.C. 147/2015 of CDRF, Malappuram)

PRESENT : 

SRI.T.S.P. MOOSATH                                      : JUDICIAL MEMBER

SRI. RANJIT. R                                                 : MEMBER

SMT. BEENA KUMARY. A                             : MEMBER

APPELLANTS:

1. The Sub Divisional Engineer, Telephone Exchange, BSNL, Thanoor, Malappuram.
2. The D.G.M, Telecom, BSNL, Malappuram. 
3. Chief General Manager, BSNL, Telecom, Thiruvananthapuram.

 (By Adv. G.S. Prakash)

                                                Vs.

RESPONDENT:

Saidu. C.P, Chithrampalli House, Thanoor, Malappuram-676 302.

JUDGMENT

SMT. BEENA KUMARY. A : MEMBER

The appellants are the opposite parties in C.C. No. 147/2015 on the file of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Malappuram.  The respondent is the complainant.  The forum directed the opposite parties to reinstate the connection of the complainant’s land phone and also directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 1,000/- as cost to the complainant.  Aggrieved by the order appellants have filed this appeal. 

2.  Case of the complainant, in brief, is that his land phone connection 0494-2445588 under opposite parties was not working from 25.10.2013 onwards.  He had made several complaints before the opposite parties.  But there was no response from the opposite parties and moreover the opposite parties are issuing the regular bills to the complainant, though it was not working.  As the complainant is a business man, he has sustained several losses due to the complaint of his land phone.  Hence he has filed the complaint. Opposite parties have not filed version and they remained exparte.  The complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts. A1 to A4 were marked on his side. 

3.  In the appeal the opposite parties stated that they have received notice from the forum, appeared before the forum and filed vakalath on 29.06.2015.  But due to the delay in getting administrative sanction the appellants/opposite parties could not file version before the forum in time.  Accordingly appellants/opposite parties were set exparte. 

4.  The appellants argued that there was no deficiency in service occurred from their side.  They have taken all efforts to redress the grievance of the complainant.  The complainant’s landline number was under cable fault and the same could not be rectified as the underground cable joint is under the concrete road.  The respondent/complainant has been duly informed the difficulty in rectifying the said cable fault and requested him to convert the land line into CDMA as per letter dated 19.08.2014 to the Sub Divisional Engineer.  Since the delay in getting administrative sanction the appellants/opposite parties were not able to file their version with supporting evidence.  Hence they prayed for remission of the case for fresh disposal after giving chance to them for filing version and adduce evidence. 

5.  From the arguments of the appellants we find that the appellants had not get opportunity before the forum to contest the case.  We are not satisfied with the reason stated for their absence before the forum.  But for the interest of justice we consider that an opportunity has to be given to the appellants/opposite parties to file version and adducing evidence and decide the case on merits.  Hence we have not gone through the merits of the case.

6.  Remission of the case setting aside the order of the district forum can be ordered only on terms directing the appellants to compensate the injury likely to be caused by the delay in culmination of the proceedings to the complainant.  Appellants have to pay Rs. 3,000/- as cost to the respondent/complainant as a condition precedent for setting aside the order and remission of the case. 

7.  Complainant/respondent is permitted to get release of the amount of Rs. 3,000/- ordered as cost from the amount deposited by the appellant at the time of institution of the appeal before this Commission, on proper application.  Refund the balance amount to the appellant on proper application. 

In the result, the appeal is allowed.  The order passed by the district forum in C.C. No. 147/2015 is set aside and the matter is remanded for fresh disposal, after giving opportunity to the appellant to file version and to adduce evidence, if any.  The district forum shall dispose off the complaint as early as possible. 

Send back the records to the district forum, forthwith.

T.S.P. MOOSATH    : JUDICIAL MEMBER

RANJIT. R                : MEMBER

                                                                        BEENA KUMARY. A         : MEMBER

jb