The District Forum has no jurisdiction to estimate telephone bills by rule of thumb without evidence of metering equipment defect or misuse of the telephone.

Mr. Surendra Kumar, Senior Member—This is an appeal against the order dated 19.4.1993 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun whereby the appellant was directed to cancel 9,000 calls of the bills dated 15.5.1992.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant was having telephone No. 26287. For this telephone, three bills were issued to him. He has alleged that for the period for which these three bills have been issued, he was out of station and there is no question of such huge number of calls. The bills are incorrect. It is also said that when he is out of station, his telephone remains locked and it is only used for receiving the calls. He alleged that his bills dated 15.1.1992, 16.3.1992 and 15.5.1992 be cancelled.

3. The opposite party alleged that the bills are correct according to meter reading and there is no discrepancy regarding this. Proper inquiry was made regarding the complaint of the complainant and no mistake was found.

4. The learned Forum after taking the evidence of the parties and hearing them allowed the complaint holding that there is possibility of user of the calls of the first two bills, regarding third bill, in the opinion of the learned Forum it may be excessive. Against which order, the present appeal has been filed.

5. Notice was issued to the opposite party several times. He did not appear. He is presumed to have been served. Therefore, the appeal was heard ex-parte.

6. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the records. The complainant is a businessman and he usually goes outside Dehradun. For the bill from 16.3.1992 to 15.5.1992, the complainant has alleged that he was in Dehradun from 9.4.1992 to 11.4.1992 and was out of station for rest of the part of this period.

7. The learned Forum did not give any finding that the meter was defective or that the telephone was misused by the Telephone Department rather it found that the two bills are correct. It also did not give any finding regarding the third bill, it was only held that in the opinion of the Forum the bill appears to be excessive.

8. It is settled principle of law that the District Forum has got no jurisdiction in estimating by application of rule of thumb the precise number of calls in a particular time unless there was adequate evidence to show that the metering equipment was defective or there has been misuse of any particular telephone by the employees of the Department. We are supported by the ruling reported in I (1991) CPJ 48 (NC)=1991 (1) CPR 102 (NC) District Manger, Telephone v. Niti Saran. In this particular case, the complainant has not alleged whether there was STD facility in his telephone or not.

9. This Commission itself in the ruling reported in IV (2004) CPJ 532=(2004) 9 CLD 509, Uppamandaliya Abhiyanta, Door Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Devi Dutt, has reported that the Forum has got no jurisdiction to curtail bills by application of rule of thumb unless there is any allegation of metering defect of misuse of the telephone.

10. In view of what has been said above the appeal is fit to be allowed and the order under appeal is also fit to be quashed.

ORDER

The appeal is hereby allowed. The order dated 19.4.1993 is hereby set aside. The complaint is also dismissed. Cost of this appeal shall be easy.

Appeal allowed.

––