BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SHIMLA, H.P.
Consumer Complaint No: 234/2008
Date of presentation: 22.07.2008
Date of decision: 28.12.2009
Rajesh Manta S/O late Shri S.R. Manta,
Village Bhamnoli (Kaptu) P.O. Summerkot,
Tehsil Rohru, District Shimla, H.P.
… Complainant.
Versus
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
Through its General Manager,
Telecom, SDA Complex, Block No.35,
Kasumpti, Shimla-9, H.P.
2. Sub Divisional Officer,
Telephone Exchange Rohru, District Shimla, HP.
… Opposite Parties.
For the complainant: Ms. Uma Manta, Advocate
For the Opposite Parties: Mr. Peeyush Verma, Advocate.
O R D E R:
Sureshwar Thakur (District Judge) President:- This instant complaint, has been filed by Shri Rajesh Manta, by invoking the provisions of Section 12, of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The complainant avers that, he is subscriber of landline telephone bearing No.246617, which is installed at his residential premises by the OP-BSNL. It is averred that he, is orchardist and agriculturist and his house, is, located at the lonely place, which is far away from village. The complainant, further proceeded to aver, that, the aforesaid landline telephone is, out of order and not functioning for more-than nine months, though, the OP-BSNL, is, charging rental, yet, has failed to make the aforesaid telephone functional and workable, despite lodging of various complaints. Hence, it is averred that there is apparent deficiency in service on the part of the OP and accordingly relief to the extent as detailed in the relief clause be awarded in favour of the complainant.
2. The OP, in its written version to the complaint, raised various preliminary objections, regarding maintainability of the complaint, and admitted that the complainant, is, subscriber of landline telephone bearing No.246617. It is contended that owing to theft of cables at, Bhamnoli village, there has been break-down of the telephone serviced, which is beyond the control of the OP and they have been prevented by circumstances beyond their control in early restoration of the disrupted lines. It is further contended that suitable rental rebate has been afforded to the consumer and further billing stopped and he has also been requested to convert the landline connection into WLL. Hence, it is contended that their, is, no deficiency in service on their part.
3. Thereafter the parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents in support of their respective rival contentions.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties, at, length and, have, also, thoroughly scanned the entire record of the case meticulously.
5. The grouse of the complainant, is, that, his landline telephone bearing No.246617, is, out of order and not in working condition, hence, disabled him of its usage, inasmuch, as, the OPs-BSNL did not render it in a workable condition. The OP-BNSNL, in, its reply has contended that, owing to theft of cable wires, their has been break-down of the telephone service, and it being beyond their control, hence, is exculpating its liability.
6. It is, not, in dispute that, the complainant, is, subscriber of landline telephone bearing No.246617, which is installed at, his residential premises, by the OPs-BSNL. The only dispute, which requires adjudication by this Forum, is, whether the OPs-BSNL, is, guilty of rendering deficiency in service, or not. However, the OPs-BSNL, in it reply which is duly supported by an affidavit of Shri Chuni Lal, working as D.E. (Admn) in the office of General Manager, BSNL, Shimla, had contended that, owing to theft of cable wires in the area, they have been prevented by circumstances beyond their control, in early restoration of the disrupted landline telephone. They further contend that suitable rental rebate has been afforded to the complainant and further billing has also been stopped and the complainant, has, also been requested vide letter dated 24.07.2008 to convert his landline telephone into WLL connection, to avoid disruption of the facility. Since, the above fact has not been repulsed or rebutted by the complainant by adduction of cogent, convincing and apposite evidence to the contrary, hence, cannot be discarded and has to be accorded sanctity.
7. The disruption, in the landline telephone of the complainant erupted owing to theft of cable wires, which in our considered opinion, was, beyond their control and could not be prevented by them, hence, no deficiency in service can be attributed on the part of the OPs-BSNL. Since, the OPs-BSNL, in its reply has contended that suitable rental rebate has been afforded to the complainant, as also, further billing has been stopped, and that the complainant has been offered WLL connection, therefore, we deem it fit and appropriate to dispose of this complaint, with a direction to the OPs-BSNL, to, afford suitable rental rebate to the complainant, if not already afforded and further to provide, him, WLL connection, if he so chooses. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. The learned counsel for the parties undertook to collect the certified copy of this order from the office, free of cost, as per rules. The file after due completion, be consigned to record room.
Announced on this, the 28th day of December, 2009.
(Sureshwar Thakur)
President.
NMehta) (Karuna Machhan) (Charanjit Singh)
Member Member.