State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (Bsnl vs Sandeep Khosla on 12 November, 2009
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB,
SCO NOS.3009-12, SECTOR 22-D, CHANDIGARH.
First Appeal No.1542 of 2007
Date of institution: 29.11.2007
Date of decision : 12.11.2009
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) (A Govt. of India Enterprises), G.P.O
Building, Jalandhar through its Principal General Manager.
.....Appellants
Versus
Sandeep Khosla resident of 285, Lajpat Nagar, Jalandhar.
.....Respondent
First Appeal against the order dated 01.10.2007
passed by the District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Jalandhar.
Before:-
Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.N.Aggarwal, President
Lt.Col. Darshan Singh (Retd.), Member
Shri Piare Lal Garg, Member Present:-
For the appellant : Sh.G.C.Babbar, Advocate For the respondent : Ex parte JUSTICE S.N.AGGARWAL, PRESIDENT Sandeep Khosla respondent was having telephone connection No.2224016. He received the telephone bill dated 05.12.2006 for a sum of Rs.13,612/-. It was challenged by him by filing the complaint in the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jalandhar (in short "the District Forum").
2. The appellants filed the written statement and contested the case.
3. Parties produced the affidavits/documents in support of their respective versions.
First Appeal No.1542 of 2007 2
4. The learned District Forum considered the matter and accepted the complaint vide impugned order dated 01.10.2007 and set aside the bill dated 05.12.2006.
5. Hence, the appeal.
6. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellants was that the learned District Forum did not have the jurisdiction to decide the controversy involved in this complaint. Reference was made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as "General Manager, Telecom v. M. Krishnan & Anr III (2009) CPJ 71 (SC)."
7. Record has been perused. Submissions have been considered.
8. It was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M. Krishnan's case (supra) that specific remedy has been made available under Section 7-B of the Telegraph Act for the customers. Therefore, the remedy under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not available. It was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment as under:-
" The dispute in this case was regarding non-payment of telephone bill for the telephone connection provided to the respondent No.1 and for the said non-payment of the bill the telephone connection was disconnected. Aggrieved against the said disconnection, the respondent No.1 filed a complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kozhikode. By order dated 26.11.2001, the Consumer Forum allowed the complaint and directed the appellant herein to re-connect the telephone connection to the respondent No.1 and pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- with interest @ First Appeal No.1542 of 2007 3 12% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint.
Aggrieved against the order of the Consumer Forum, the appellant filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging the jurisdiction of the consumer forum. A learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the writ petition. Thereafter, the appellant filed a Writ Appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench felt that the matter required consideration by a larger Bench and hence the matter was placed before the Full Bench. By the impugned order the Full Bench of the High Court has dismissed the writ appeal. Hence, the appellant is before us by way of present appeal by special leave.
In our opinion when there is a special remedy provided in Section 7-B of the Indian Telegraph Act regarding disputes in respect of telephone bills, then the remedy under the Consumer Protection Act is by implication barred."
9. Since the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the Consumer Forums do not have the jurisdiction and the remedy is available to the customers under Section 7-B of the Telegraph Act, therefore, this appeal is accepted and the impugned judgment dated 01.10.2007 is set aside. The parties are relegated to the remedy available under Section 7-B of the Telegraph Act. First Appeal No.1542 of 2007 4
10. The arguments in this appeal were heard on 06.11.2009 and the orders were reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties.
11. The appeal could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of Court cases.
(JUSTICE S.N.AGGARWAL) PRESIDENT (LT. COL. DARSHAN SINGH-RETD.) MEMBER (PIARE LAL GARG) MEMBER November 12, 2009.
Paritosh