C.C. Pant, Member - (1.) THIS is service provider's appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 6.12.1994 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun in consumer complaint No. 607 of 1994. Vide its order, the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and has directed the service provider to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 2,500 as compensation and Rs. 250 towards litigation expenses and to give rebate in rent for a period of five months and also to adjust the same in future bills. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the complainant -Sh. Baijeet Singh Sethi had taken a telephone connection No. 27470 from the Telecom Department - opposite party for his residence. The complainant has alleged that the said connection was lying dead since 20.7.1993. The complainant lodged a complaint with the opposite party, but the opposite party put it in order only on 15.2.1994. Again, it went out of order on 11.3.1994. As per the complainant, since this date, the telephone remained out of order. The opposite party, in spite of the fact that the telephone was not in working order, charged periodic rent for the same. The complainant made several complaints to the service provider, but to no avail. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the service provider, the complainant filed consumer complaint before the District Forum, Dehradun. The District Forum, after an appreciation of the facts of the case, allowed the consumer complaint vide impugned order dated 6.12.1994 in the above manner. Aggrieved by the said order, the opposite party has filed this appeal.
(2.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and respondent in person and also perused the material placed on record. The learned Counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant -Telecom Department has not made any deficiency in service, because the telephone connection of the respondent -complainant was disconnected due to nonpayment of telephone bills. Further, the telephone was not continuously out of order for 5 months, as alleged by the respondent. It was out of order for a short period due to some technical fault in the line and underground cable fault. The learned Counsel also submitted that there was no wilful or deliberate negligence on the part of the appellant and some technical problem had cropped up due to the fact the Telecom Department had switched over the Electronic System. Since the respondent's telephone connection was out of order for a few days, he is not entitled to any compensation under Section 9 of the Indian Telegraph Act.
(3.) THE respondent reiterated the facts of the case and argued in support of the impugned order.;