KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL NO.721/03 JUDGMENT DATED.13.10.09 PRESENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA -- MEMBER 1. The Sub Divisional Engineer, BSNL, Murickassery – 685604. 2. The Divisional Engineer, -- APPELLANTS Telecom, BSNL, Thodupuzha,Idukki. 3. The Chief General Manager, BSNL, Thiruvananthapuram. (By Adv.K.R.Haridas) Vs. Sukumaran.E.N. Eayappattu House, -- RESPONDENTS Konnakkamaly.P.O,Idukki-685604. JUDGMENT SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA,MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Idukki in the file OP.No.30/04 dated 27.5.04. The appellants are the opposite parties in the above mentioned OP who prefers this appeal from the above order. The complainant applied for a telephone connection by making payment of Rs.1,000/- since his mother is aged 95 and being a resident of an undeveloped area, a telephone is absolutely necessary for him to contact the outer world. But after the expiry of 4 years, the appellants have informed that they are prepared to refund the amount. Aggrieved by this information, the complainant preferred a complainant before the Forum below seeking a direction to give immediate connection and also for a payment of interest on deposit of 4 years and cost of Rs.1,000/- by the appellants. 2. In their written version the appellant/opposite parties contended that cable wire was not available and entire underground cable laid in that area was damaged. More over, his case was pending before the Judicial 1st Class Magistrate Court, Idukki and in the Hon. High Court of Kerala between BSNL and PWD. On obtaining the permission to underground cable after completion old work, connection will be provided without delay. 3. The complainant produced 4 documents and marked Exts. P1 to P4. For the opposite side Ext.R1 to R4 were marked. No interest was examined for both sides. After considering the entire evidence the Forum below directed the opposite parties to provide Telephone connection to the complainant within 3 months. The opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.500/- as costs of this petition within one month to the complainant. The appellant prefers this appeal from the above impugned order passed by the Forum below. This appeal came before this Commission, Heard and passed the following orders. The apex Court of India settled a legal position. According to the decision Consumer Foras, Commissions are not having any jurisdiction to interfere. The cases involved BSNL dispute. The Hon. Supreme Court held that there is a provision in the Indian Telegraphic Act. If any dispute will be arised for redressal the BSNL have the right to appoint a arbitrator to deal with the dispute. In the shadow of the above decision, this Commission is not having any jurisdiction to pass any order in this appeal. The appellant/opposite party is suggested to comply the provisions of the Indian Telegraphic Act, and dispose the matter according to the direction of the Hon. Supreme Court of India. In the result, this appeal is disposed and set aside the order passed by the Forum below. Both parties are directed to suffer their own respective costs. These points are answered accordingly. M.K.ABDULLA SONA -- MEMBER JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT | 
