WEST BENGAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CALCUTTA
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.C. Datta, President;
Mrs. Silpi Majumder & Mr. D. Karforma, Members
GASTO BEHARI PATRA—Appellant
versus
CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, CALCUTTA TELEPHONES & ORS.—Respondents
Case No. 618/A of 1997—Decided on 20.3.2002

Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986-Section 13-Complaint-Reference to Arbitrator-Legality of complaint alleging excess billing-District Forum referred matter to Arbitrator under Section 7B Indian Telegraph Act with direction to decide same within fixed time-Justified-Arbitrator is qualified technical person and as such quite competent to determine matter.

       Vide Order dated 28-8-1997 the Forum referred the disputed bill for Cycle 9/96 to the Arbitrator under Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act with a direction to the Arbitrator to commence the proceeding before him within 45 days from the date of receipt of disputed bill and to conclude the proceeding within the subsequent two months. Certain other directions were also passed. Being aggrieved thereby the Petitioner has appealed. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submits that it has become almost a routine affair to refer the dispute regarding excess billing of a Telephone to the Arbitrator without itself examining and deciding the dispute on the basis of materials available before the Forum. He of course submits that in appropriate cases reference to the Arbitrator may be necessary, but it cannot be made as a matter of rule. The substance of his arguments is that the Forum itself should resolve the dispute regarding excess billing instead of referring the dispute to the Arbitrator. It appears that the self same point was raised before the Forum and the forum by the impugned Judgment discuss the matter threadbare and dispose of the questions raised therein. It may be remembered that the Consumer Forum is a special Forum established to provide for better protection of the interest of consumer and for the settlement of Consumer disputes and the matter connected therewith. There is no dispute that this is a consumer dispute and as such the Forum has jurisdiction to examine the case. It may also be remembered that the Arbitrator is a expert in technical investigation of the dispute. Sometimes it may happen that excess billing may be the result of wrong or incorrect calculation or of negligent act of concerned officials or because of incorrect reading shown by meter on account of technical or mechnical fault. In our view such technical investigations are required to be carried out at the instance of authority upon hearing the contentions of both sides. The Arbitrator is a technically qualified authority. The Consumer Forum is required to dispose of a dispute within a time frame fixed by the statue. Sometimes examination of witness and record of evidence of both sides including cross-examination etc. is necessary for resolution of the dispute. Since the Consumer Forum is to try the matter in a summary way such purpose will be frustrated if cases are allowed to continue for an indefinite period. To sum up we may observe that in appropriate cases the Forum can very well decide the dispute if it does not involve elaborate evidence of both sides. But in appropriate cases specially when a technical question arises it would be better for the Forum to refer the dispute to the Arbitrator because the Arbitrator is a qualified technical person and as such quite competent to determine the matter.