State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Manager Director, Intermedia Cable ... vs Amrapalishree Co Operative Housing ... on 7 December, 2011
C/113/2007
BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA,
MUMBAI
First Appeal No. A/06/106
(Arisen out of Order Dated 14/12/2005 in Case
No. 288/2003 of District Pune)
1. The Manager
Director, Intermedia Cable Communications Pvt. Ltd.
Reg. and Head Office
at 1018, Padamji Path, New Nana Peth, Pune - 411 002.
Maharashtra
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Amrapalishree Co
Operative Housing Society Ltd.
Through its Chairman,
Mr. Vijay Vishnu Moharir, Flat No. D-23 of Amrapalishree Co. Op. Hsg.
Soc. Ltd., Near Aga Khan Palace, Pune Nagar Road, Pune - 411 006.
Maharashtra
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
Hon'ble Mr. P.N.
Kashalkar PRESIDING MEMBER
Hon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar Member PRESENT:
None present.
O R D E R Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar Honble Presiding Judicial Member:(1)
This appeal is filed by the original Opponent against the judgement and award passed by the District Consumer disputes Redressal Forum, Pune in Consumer complaint No.288/2003 on 14th December, 2005. By allowing the complaint partly the District Forum restrained Appellant/Opponent from disconnecting the Cable TV Network service to the members of the Complainant Society, so long they continue to pay prescribed fees or rentals to the Opponent. The Opponents were also directed to pass authentic receipts of entertainment tax, recovered from the members of the Society and directed to pay compensation of `5,000/- to the Complainant Society and also costs of `500/-. Aggrieved by this order the original Opponent has come up in appeal.(2)
From the reading of the complaint it is clear that the Society members had taken cable TV network from Appellant. Appellant was providing cable TV network to all the member of the Society and was charging `315/- per month as rent. Thereafter, Opponent started demanding `30/-
towards entertainment tax. But authentic receipt was not given. After several letters the Opponent agreed to pass authentic receipt for entertainment tax and Complainant society agreed to pay monthly rental of `352/- per member. However, the Opponent backed out from its assurance and therefore, the Complainant Society filed consumer complaint seeking injunction restraining the Opponent from disconnecting cable TV network connection and directing Opponent to issue authentic entertainment tax receipt and also claimed `50,000/- as compensation and costs of the proceeding. The Opponent filed written version and contested the matter.(3)
The District Forum relying upon the affidavit of Mr.Vijay Vishnu Moharir and copy of letter dated 24.11.2003 received by Entertainment Officer held that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Opponent. He had threatened to disconnect the Cable TV. Network connection of the members of the Society without issuing any notice. The District Forum therefore passed impugned order restraining Opponent from disconnecting the cable TV connection service to the members of the Society, so long they continue to pay prescribed fees or rentals to the Opponent. The Opponents were also directed to pass authentic receipts of entertainment tax, recovered from the members of the Society and directed to pay compensation of `5,000/- to the Complainant Society and also costs of `500/-. Aggrieved by this order the original Opponent has come up in appeal.(4)
This appeal was lying unattended since it was filed in 2006. As per policy of this Commission this appeal was placed before us for disposal on 21st September, 2011. On that day the appeal was displayed on the notice board of this Commission and also on the internet board and since both the parties were absent we directed office to issue intimation by ordinary post to both the parties and the matter was adjourned to today i.e. on 07.12.2011. On 21.11.2011 the office has sent notice to both the parties. But today both the parties are absent.(5)
We perused the affidavit, the pleadings and documents placed on record and also impugned order passed by the District Forum and we have proceeded to dispose of this appeal on merit.(6)
We are finding that the dispute between the parties in respect of entertainment tax recovered from the members of the Complainant Society and receipts were not passed by the Cable TV Operator to the members of the Society. If the Cable TV Operator was saying that Society was required to pay per member `30/- per month as entertainment tax then it was the duty of the Cable Operator to give receipt to the members of the Society. The Opponent was not doing so and he threatened to disconnect Cable TV network service to the members of the Society. The District Forum therefore held that threatening to disconnect the service of Cable TV network connection is per se deficiency in service and without prior notice no such cable TV Network Service should be disconnected by any Cable TV Operator and passed the impugned order.
We are finding that the order passed by the District Forum is just and proper and there is no merit in the appeal and hence, the order:
O R D E R
(i) Appeal is dismissed.
(ii) No order as to costs.
(iii) Inform the parties accordingly.
Pronounced on 7th December, 2011.
[Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar] PRESIDING MEMBER [Hon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar] Member ep