news details |
|
|
| Advocate wins case against BSNL in consumer court | | | Early Time Reporter
Jammu | June 18
Observing that the employees of the telephone department are not masters of the customers J&K State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has dismissed appeal of BSNL preferred against the award dated 17th Oct., 2005 of Divisional Consumer Forum, Srinagar, being meritless with costs of Rs. 4000/- to be paid by the appellant.
Dismissing the appeal, the commission headed by Justice G. D. Sharma (Retd.) and Mrs. Rifat Aijaz member also observed that the employees of the telephone department are in service and their goal must be to serve the customers adding that the telephone department should always be ready and willing to serve the subscriber promptly.
G.M.D Baba, a practising lawyer of J&K High Court at Srinagar, is subscriber of Telephone No. 245596 which was installed at his residence. The said telephone remained out of service on various dates w.e.f 23.6.2005 to 18.12.2005 and during that period, he made number of complaints with BSNL, Srinagar but the telephone was not made functional. He filed complaint before the Forum. The appellant had failed to file written version within time and its right was closed. Also no evidence in rebuttal was produced by the appellant. The Forum had awarded the damages in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- against the appellant for deficiency in service.
Mr. M Kapta, Advocate appearing for BSNL took number of pleas in the memo of appeal including the one that all the equipments used by the appellant are electronic equipments which are not manually operated and they cannot be faulted as no person can interfere with their functioning. This plea according to the appellant was taken before the Forum during the course of arguments but was not considered properly because the Forum had failed to call record from the office of the appellant. Without perusal of record, outright rejection of the defence was not justified.
The Commission after thoughtfully considering rival contentions of counsel for parties dismissed appeal of insurer observing that "The complainant is an advocate by profession and requires the telephone facility for professional work. Otherwise also, the telephone facility has become necessary in our day to day life. The department is not supposed lightly to brush aside complaints made by the general public.
Commission further held that "The appellant is given two months time to make the payment of the awarded amount by the Forum as well as the costs imposed herein, failing which interest shall become payable at the rate of 9% on the awarded amount of the Forum." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
