National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Consumer Protection Council vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr. on 25 January, 2002
ORDER
D.P. Wadhwa, J. (President)
1. Complainant, a voluntary consumer association, is aggrieved by the order dated 28.12.1994 of the Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, dismissing its complaint. Complaint pertained to claim made on behalf of some subscribers of telephones whose telephones remained out of order for more than 7 days or 14 days in the city of Ahmedabad on account of cloud burst on 9.7.1993. Because of the unprecedented downpour many telephone lines became dead. Complainant sought rebate in rental @ Rs. 180/- per month of those subscribers whose telephones remained out of order of more than 14 days and damages @ Rs. 6/- per day of those subscribers whose telephone remained out of order for 7 days or less. A list of the subscribers on whose behalf complaint was filed was annexed to the complaint. There was a further claim of Rs. 7.50 per subscriber on account of mental tension, loss of business etc. All these claims for damages/compensation comes to Rs. 4,80,750/-, below the jurisdiction of the State Commission. In order to invoke jurisdiction of the State Commission complainant claimed costs of Rs. 25,000/-, thus making a total claim over Rs. 5.00 lakhs. Cost is always with the jurisdiction of the court and does not form part of the claim.
2. An objection was raised by the General Manager, Ahmedabad Telecom District that claim was unduly exaggerated to bring the complaint with in the jurisdiction of the State Commission. We are of the view, the objection was well taken. Action of the complainant to add Rs. 25,000/- as costs to the claim of Rs. 4,80,750/- to make it over Rs. 5.00 lakhs was certainly questionable. State Commission should have relegated the complainant to the concerned District Forum. We cannot approve such an effort on the part of the complainant to circumvent the provisions of law in such a manner. Moreover it is not a case for claim of compensation for alleged mental tension, inconvenience, loss of business etc. when admittedly extensive damage had been caused to telephone liens in the city due to devastating heavy rain and the General Manager, Ahmedabad Telecom District and the staff did their best to restore the line in shortest possible time. A voluntary consumer association is expected to act in a rational and conscientious manner.
3. It is the case of the respondents themselves that because of the cloud burst on 9.7.1993 whole city of Ahmedabad was flooded. It is further submitted that in the city there were various developmental activities like widening of roads, resurfacing, laying of pipelines, construction of foot-path, laying of electric cables which were being undertaken by local agencies and there was no co-ordination among them. On that account there was serve and extensive damage to telephone cables. It was also pointed out that in most cases damage to cables appeared during the heavy rains when rain water entered into the cables and fault developed. It was pleaded that because of all these factors and cloud burst cable faults increase dad it was all beyond the control of the department and hat it was an act of God and it was not humanly possible to put everything right. In this view of the matter department issued a press not on 25.7.1993 informing the subscribers that department would grant rebate in rent if the telephone of any subscriber had remained continuously out of order for a 7 days or more. Union Minister of State for Communication also made a public announcement on 2.10.1993 that those telephone subscribers whose telephone liens had remained out of order for more than 14 days they would not be charged the monthly rental.
4. Complainant had been non-suited by the State Commission on the ground that there was no affidavit filed by the complainant is support of the allegation made in the complainant and that no oral evidence was led. It was observed by the State Commission that complainant failed to prove the allegation and held that in the absence of any convincing proof it was not possible to accept the facts regarding the dates of complaints of individual subscribers as to the period during which their telephones remained out of order. This finding was returned by the State Commission on the plea of the respondents that whosoever subscriber lodged a complaint that was recorded in that fault cards and on that basis rebate was granted to those subscribers. Respondents also filed a list of those subscribers to whom rebate had been granted. It was submitted that fault cards showed the date and time of the complaint and the clearance of that complaint.
5. We are of the view that the approach adopted by the State Commission was not correct. With widespread damage to the cables it as not the case of the department that only one individual subscriber's telephone would have remained out of order. A cable feeds many a telephone and department would certainly have known as to which of these telephones would have remained out of order that were fed by a particular cable. Moreover when one subscriber lodges a complaint and is informed that because of fault in the cable it would take some time to attend to the complaint, the neighbouring subscriber whose telephone is also dead when told of the complaint already made would not in all probability make his own complaint, particularly when it was a known fact that there was extensive damage to telephone lines all over the city. Then the public notice and the announcement by the minister are made days after damage to the cables and the telephones becoming out of order. As a matter of fact, State Commission itself was conscious of the fact that in some cases complaints were made late and the telephone remained out of order for more period than was stated in the list of the respondents. In cases like this State Commission should have taken a pragmatic view of the matter and not bogged down to strict rules of evidence. Respondents could certainly have come up with a statement as to how many telephones could have bene out of order which were being energised by a particular cable which had snapped or was damaged on account of rain water. Every body was aware hat fault had crept in many telephone lines due to heavy rain. In this case, in our view, real issue has been skirted and justice eluded to many subscribers.
6. Having said so question arises what relief can be granted in the present case. As we have noted above, fault in the telephone occurred in July,1993 and we are in the month of January 2002. We can foresee the difficulty that would be faced by the department if we direct it two review the whole lot of cases of the affected subscribers. We think after having ex pressed our opinion on the issues involve din this case it is better to leave the matter at that. We would, therefore, dismiss the complaint, but would award cost to the appellant which we assess at Rs. 2000/-.