This is a complaint made by one Avijit Gope of 21/C, Panchanantala Road, P.S.- Lake, Kolkata-700 029 against Area Manager (South), Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Calcutta Telephones, 82, Ballygunge Place, P.S.-Gariahat, Kolkata-700 019, praying for direction upon the OP to return Rs.554/- and replace the faulty telephone bill, return of all the amount charged by B.S.N.L. from the date of complaint with interest @ 100%p.a. till final payment and to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for deficiency in service and to pay Rs.4,80,000/- as litigation cost.
Facts in brief are that Complainant has filed this case on behalf of his mother Sri Ratna Gope. OP is the Area Manager (South) of B.S.N.L. Land line telephone of his bearing No.033 24611566 did not work properly and he was unable to make call. But, his mother used to pay regular bills. He made a complaint to B.S.N.L. but, it could not be corrected. Officials of the B.S.N.L. asked him to purchase a new land-line set. He made complaint on several occasions but of no use. So, he filed this complaint on behalf of his mother.
OP filed written version and denied all the allegations of the complaint. Further, OP has stated that he wanted to supply one repaired telephone to the Complainant, but, Complainant refused to accept it. Further, OP has stated that as per circular of B.S.N.L. Rs.600/- would be charged in the next bill for the instrument. Complainant, despite all efforts, did not accept the repaired set and also did not agree to purchase the new set. So, OP prayed for dismissal of this complaint.
Decision with reasons
Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief wherein he has repeated the facts mentioned in the complaint petition. On the contrary, OP put questionnaire to the affidavit-in-chief of the Complainant to which Complainant has replied. In the reply Complainant has stated that OP did not provide the proper service.
OP also filed evidence on affidavit wherein he has reiterated the facts mentioned in the written version to which Complainant has put questionnaire and OP has filed affidavit-in-reply.
Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
On perusal of the complaint petition, Complainant has prayed for return of Rs.554/- and replacement of the faulty telephone bill and return of all the amount charged by the B.S.N.L. from the date of complaint with 100% interest.
On perusal of the document we find that one telephone bill of April, 2016, Complainant has filed, showing that the OP charged Rs.554/-. On perusal of this, it appears that there is fixed charge of Rs.440/-. So, it cannot be said that B.S.N.L. who is OP made any deficiency in service by issuing an inflated bill. Further, it appears that Complainant filed this complaint on 17.6.2016. There is no mention of amount as to how much Complainant paid since filing of this case on which Complainant requires 100% interest. In the form of document also there is nothing on behalf of the Complainant to show as to how much he paid to B.S.N.L. upon which he has claimed 100% interest. Accordingly, there is no ground to allow this prayer.
Prayer (b) is to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- for deficiency in service. It appears on perusal of the affidavit-in-chief that Complainant made requests for replacing the telephone set for which he was asked to pay Rs.600/- which would be charged in the next bill. Complainant has not alleged that the telephone set which was provided by B.S.N.L. is new one and was covered by warranty period and so he cannot pay any charge. As such, there does not appear any deficiency in service and so question of compensation of Rs.5,000/- does not arise.
Further, Complainant has charged litigation cost of Rs.4,80,000/-. This appears very abnormal because it reflects that Complainant has engaged such an advocate whose fee is at least Rs.50,000/- per appearance. There is no such fact forthwith coming. It appears that Complainant pursued this case for his mother himself and, so, question of granting litigation cost of Rs.4,80,00/- does not arise.
Hence,
ordered
CC/262/2016 is dismissed on contest.
