AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Feeling aggrieved, rather annoyed of the award dated 03.06.2019, passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Sriganganagar, petitioners have approached this Court. Facts are few, the amount is meagre, but petitioners' ego is mammoth, which has propelled them to approach this Court.
The respondent Subhash got his post-paid connection converted to pre-paid and thus became entitled to get a refund of his security deposit of Rs.500/- and Rs.307/-, being the excess amount paid. After having approached the office of the petitioners many times for getting the amount back, the respondent knocked at the doors of Permanent Lok Adalat by way of filing a petition under Section 22C of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1987'). Respondent raised a grievance that despite getting his connection converted from post-paid to pre-paid, the present petitioners have not refunded the security amount of Rs.500/- and Rs.307/- the excess amount charged from him.
The facts are undisputed that despite receiving a notice from the respondent's counsel, petitioners did not remit the legitimate amount due to him and even during pendency of the case before the Permanent Lok Adalat, the present petitioners - officers of BSNL did not even offer the amount of Rs.807/-, while admitting that such amount is payable to the respondent Subhash Kumar.
The only ruse taken by the petitioners before the Permanent Lok Adalat was that there was a technical flaw for which the amount could not be paid. No plausible or justifiable explanation was furnished before the Lok Adalat as to why the amount could not be refunded to the respondent. It was simply stated that a refund order has been issued, but cheque could not be issued for procedural reasons. Petitioners have rather ridiculed the respondent by the following stand in their reply:-
"9. यह कि परिवाद पत्र की चरण संख्या 9 के कथनों का उत्तर उपरोक्त चरणों में विस्तारपूवर्क दिया जा चुका है। इसके अलावा परिवादी ने इस मद में यह दर्ज नहीं किया कि वह अप्रार्थी संख्या 1 से किस तारीख को मिला। पूर्वगामी चरणों में निवेदन किया जा चूका है कि सिक्योरिटी राशि का रिफण्ड का चैक परिमण्डल कार्यालय जयपुर से पत्रावली का एवं अकाउंट शीट का अवलोकन करने के पश्चात ही चैक बनकर आता है और परिमण्डल कार्यालय में पूरे राजस्थान के रिफण्ड संबंधी मामले विचाराधीन होते है। प्रार्थी का मामला किसी मोटी राशि का रिफण्ड नहीं है, मात्र 807 रूपये के रिफण्ड का है तथा परिवादी के नाम रूपये 807 रूपये का का रिफण्ड दिनांक 25.09.2018 को जारी कर दिया था, जिसका आर आर नम्बर 8170 दिनांक 25.09.2018 है। यह ऑन लाईन सुविधा के तहत परिवादी को सूचित भी कर दिया गया था, मगर परिवादी ने वर्तमान मामला 16.01.2019 को माननीय न्यायालय क समक्ष पेश कर न्यायिक प्रक्रिया का अनुचित लाभ उठाने का प्रयास किया है।
यह कि परिवाद पत्र की चरण संख्या 10 के कथनों में यह सही है कि प्रार्थी द्वारा अपने अधिवक्ता प्रदीप कासनिया द्वारा विधिक नोटिस दिनांक 04.10.2018 को जारी किया गया था, जिस पर त्वरित कार्यवाही करते हुए परिवादी के मामले को शीघ्र से शीघ्र निस्तारित करवाने की सूचना भी भिजवा दी गई थी और इस बात से भी अवगत करवा दिया था कि परिवादी के नाम रूपये 807 का रिफण्ड 25.09.2018 को ही जारी कर दिया गया था, जिसका आर आर नम्बर 8170 दिनांक 25.09.2018 है, के बावजूद परिवादी ने वर्तमान प्रकरण स्वच्छ हाथो से लेकर नहीं आने के कारण परिवादी का परिवाद इसी बिन्दु पर खारिज किये जाने योग्य है। परिवादी को ऐसी कोई मानसिक, आर्थिक क्षति नहीं हुई है, मात्र 807 रूपये की तच्छ राशि को आधार बनाकर परिवादी ने 20,000/- रूपया मानसिक, आर्थिक व शारिरिक क्षति के रूप में जो क्लेम किया है, ... ... ..."
It is surprising that even at this stage, the present petitioners have not bothered to make payment of Rs.807/-, to show sense of remorse. This Court fails to absorb or swallow the stubborn attitude and high-handedness of the petitioners, in making a consumer run from pillar to post, even for such a meagre amount.
In considered opinion of this Court, the amount of fine, i.e. Rs.10,000/-, imposed by the Permanent Lok Adalat upon the petitioners was justified in the present factual backdrop; it was rather on a lower side, particularly looking to the contents of their reply before the Lok Adalat and given the fact that they did not offer the cheque during the pendnecy of case before the Lok Adalat.
The writ petition is dismissed. The stay application also stands dismissed.
If the amount aforesaid (Rs.10,807/-) is not remitted to the respondent Subhash Kumar within a period of one month from today, he shall be free to file an application before this Court for enhancement of the amount.
A copy of this order be sent to the respondent Subhash Kumar so also to the CMD, BSNL, Bharat Sanchar Bhavan, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi-110 001 by registered post acknowledgment due for information so that he can at least avoid frivolous litigation and ensure that the amount of fine (Rs.10,000/-) and the cost of present litigation (counsel's fee etc.) is recovered equally from the salaries of petitioners Nos.1 and 2.