AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
-THE Revision Petitioner, who was the Complainant before the District Forum, had assailed the telephone bill dated 11th of December, 1990forll40callsforRs.1,075/-. THE District Forum by its Order dated27.06.1991 decided that the bill for 11th December, also the subsequent bill of 11.2.1991 be reduced to 250 local calls each and directed that the Complainant should be billed accordingly. THE State Commission, on the appeal of the respondent here, Divisional Engineer, Telegraphs modified the order of the District Forum and limited the same to the disputed bill of 11th of December, 1990 and those preceding it, if any. So far as the telephone bill for the subsequent period viz. of 11th February, is concerned, the State Commission has rightly observed that the parties cannot travel beyond the basic pleadings and since the bill after the disputed bill of 11th December, 1990 was not in issue at all, the order giving relief in respect of such a bill cannot be upheld. On merits, the State Commission was perfectly correct in passing the said order.
THERE is no error of jurisdiction or any material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction vesting in the State Commission. The Revision Petition is, therefore, dismissed. THERE is no order as to costs. Revision petition dismissed.