By Smt. E. Ayishakutty, Member<br /> <br /> 1. This complainant is a telephone technician in B.S.N.L. Office. When he was residing at Malappuram in 2001 opposite party requested him to take a cable connection to his residence at Urumancheri quarters, Uphill, Malappuram. Opposite party assured the complainant that whether he would change his quarters or get transfer he would have get back the amount that he has paid as advance. Believed this complainant took the connection to his residence and paid Rs.1,500/- as advance for the connection. Then he was transferred to Areacode and so he decided to vacate his quarter. He reported this to opposite party and requested him to refund Rs.1,500/- as advance amount he has paid for the connection. But opposite party disagreed to pay the amount saying that it was installation charge and not refundable. Opposite party violated the promise he has given at the time of providing connection. Therefore opposite party committed unfair trade practice and has deficiency in his service. Hence the complainant filed this complaint.<br /> 2. Complainant is praying for refund of Rs.1,500/- together with compensation of Rs.5,000/- and cost of Rs.2,000/-.<br /> 3. Opposite party filed version. He resists all the averments made by the complainant except the admittance of connection provided. Opposite party admitted that he has provided the cable connection to the complainant to his quarters at Uphill, Malappuram. He has not collected advance or installation charge if any from the complainant. Opposite party says that the cable was drawn by him through telephone posts and electric posts. When the telephone department ordered to remove the cables from these posts, he approached the complainant who is an employ of telephone department and requested him to help opposite party. Complainant agreed to do it and opposite party paid him Rs.500/- for this help. Complainant told opposite party to provide a cable connection to his residence at Urumancheri quarters. Opposite party provided this connection atonce without collecting any charges. But the telephone department removed the ables from the telephone posts. So a dispute has arised between opposite party and complainant. Opposite party asked him refund of Rs.500/- that he has given to him earlier. Complainant refused to give it and opposite party threatened him that he would inform the matter to the telephone department. Therefore according to opposite party the complainant filed this petition against opposite party as a revenge upon him. So the complaint has no merits and he is not entitled to get any relief. Hence the complaint may be dismissed.<br /> 4. Complainant denied all these contentions made by opposite party. He filed affidavit. A commission was appointed to check the statusquo of the cable connection of the complainant's residence. The commissioner Adv. Rakhi submitted the report stating that the cable connection is still existing there. No document produced by the complainant. The commission report marked as Ext.C1 on the side of complainant. No documents produced by opposite party. The complainant affirmed in his affidavit that he has paid Rs.1,500/- as advance for the cable connection to his quarters to opposite party. Complainant has not received receipt for this payment even though he has asked it on several occasions.<br /> 5. Opposite party admits that he has transferred this connection to another subscriber who is residing at the quarters which the complainant has resided. He has not collected connection charges from him also. To say that the connection was provided without collecting connection charges is certainly not acceptable. The cable operators have a general tendency of not issuing receipt or bill for the payment of connection charges. The most probability is that the connection was provided on payment of connection charges. We therefore accept the contention of the complainant and held that connection charges were paid. So while the complainant give back the cable connection, he is entitled to get refund of the advance amount or connection charges from opposite party.<br /> 6. In the result we allow the complaint and order opposite party to pay the complainant a sum of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred only) within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No order as to costs.<br /> <br /> Dated this 26th day of August, 2008.<br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> <br /> Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil <br /> Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Nil<br /> Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> Court document marked on the side of complainant : Ext.C1<br /> Ext.C1 : Commission report dated, 2-4-2003.<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER<br />