KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION  VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL NO.653/13

JUDGMENT DATED:30.04.2014

PRESENT : 

JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI                        :  PRESIDENT

SHRI. V.V. JOSE                                                         : MEMBER

P. Sankarankutty, Porakkattu House,

Thalavanikkara, Thalore.P.O.                                    : APPELLANT

          Vs.

1.   Kerala Circle Manager,

Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd.,

Kerala Head Office, 2^nd floor,

Ashi’s Supermarket,

High Road Junction,

Marwe Drive, Kochi.

2.   Jenay rodrigues,                                                          : RESPONDENTS

Nodal Officer, Vodafone Essar-

Cellular Ltd., 1^st floor Mather Square,

 Kochi.

3.   Vinodh, Branch Manager,

Thrissur District Vodafone Essar Cullular Ltd.,

Office,E-Town Building, Kizhakke Kotta,

Thrissur.

(By Adv: Sri. Shyam Padman)

JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SHRI.P.Q. BARKATH ALI : PRESIDENT

This is an appeal filed by the complainant in CC.542/09 on the file of CDRF, Thrissur challenging the order of the Forum dated, January 15, 2013 dismissing the complaint.

2.      The complainant filed the complaint before the Forum alleging that he has recharged his mobile phone having No.9846653872 on September 06, 2006 for Rs.777/- from the opposite party who did not provide him with the promised talk time.

3.      First opposite party is Kerala Circle Manager, Vodafone Essar Cellular Limited, Kochi, 2^nd opposite party is its Nodal Officer and 3^rd opposite party is Branch Manager at Thrissur.  They raised the maintainability of the complaint by filing I.A.921/11.  The Forum dismissed the complaint as not maintainable in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Prakash Varma Vs. Idea Cellular Limited and Another 2011 CTJ 494 SC and also in General Manager Telecom Vs. M.Krishnan and Another in Civil Appeal No.7687/2004.  The Delhi High Court in Writ Petition No. WP ( c) 8285/10 and CM.No.21319/10 dated, February 06, 2012 found that the principles laid down in the above cited decisions of the Supreme Court do not apply to the present case as the law under section.7 B of the Telegraph Act at all, could be applied, had the dispute arises between petitioner and Telegraph Authority, which the opposite parties are not and that merely by a license under section-4 of Indian Telegraph Act does not confirm it the status of a Telegraph Authority.  In the light of the principles laid down in the above decision of the High Court of Delhi we are of the view that complaint is maintainable.

In the result appeal is allowed.  The impugned order of the Forum dismissing the complaint as not maintainable is set aside.  The complaint is found maintainable.  The matter is remanded to the Forum for fresh disposal in accordance with law.  Both parties shall appear before the Forum in 01.06.2014.

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATHALI:  PRESIDENT

V.V. JOSE          : MEMBER

VL.