Y.S.VERMA vs Union of India

THIS complaint has been filed by Sh. Y.S. Verma R/o L-46A, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi against the General Manager, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited and others.

BRIEF facts of the case are that the complainant deposited a sum of Rs. 8,000/- with the opposite party for getting a new telephone connection under OYT Scheme. That due to the negligence of the opposite party OYT telephone was not given to the complainant whereas OYT telephone connections were cleared for all those consumers who had booked the OYT telephone in the month of August 1989. The complainant had booked the same in the month of August, 1988 and that due to the negligence and mala fide acts of the opposite party, the complainant had suffered losses upto Rs. 2,20,000/- on account of business dislocation, mental injury, expenses paid for temporary connection etc. In the prayer, the complainant has claimed a sum of Rs. 2,20,000/- as compensation for the negligent act of the respondents. In their reply the respondents have denied the allegations being misconcieved and unsubstantiated. They however, admitted that the complainant did apply for OYT telephone on 30.8.88 at New Delhi for his address at A-1/92, Panchsheel Enclave, New Delhi and that the complainant had subsequently requested for the change of address at L-46A, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi vide his letter dated 10.9.89. His signatures affixed on the letter for change of address however, did not tally with the one''s submitted at the time of original booking and as such the respondents had asked the complainant vide their letter dated 29.12.89 to furnish the specimen signatures duly attested. The complain- ant did not respond for quite sometime and ultimately he visited the office of the respondent personally on 19.4.90 and his request for the change of address was acceded to immediately and orders for the new connections were issued on the same day itself. The complainant''s telephone was connected within 10 days and he was provided with telephone No. 6446091 which he was enjoying on his temporary connection. Thus there was no delay on the part of the respondent and instead they had acted with utmost promptitude and that they cannot be blamed for the delay caused by the complainant himself for his failure to submit the attested specimen signatures. The above version of the respondents was supported by an affidavit submitted by one Sh. P.C. Jain, Asstt. General Manager working with the respondent Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited

We have heard the parties at length and gone through the record. It was an admitted fact that the complainant had been released OYT connection. During the course of arguments also Shri B.C. Parikh, learned Counsel for the complainant did concede that when others who had booked their telephones under this category upto August, 1989, were given the connections, the complainant was also given a connection as applied for by him. As such the complainant could not explain and convince the Commission as to how any discrimination had been made in his case. The learned Counsel for the complainant could not quantify and explained to our satisfaction as to how he had based the compensation amount to the tune of Rs. 2,20,000/-.

A careful perusal of the papers submitted by both the parties lead to only one conclusion that the complainant was also released a telephone connection under OYT category alongwith all such persons who had booked the telephone between August, 1988 to August, 1989. We, therefore, find that this complaint moved by Sh. Y.S. Verma is nothing but an exercise in futility and that the complaint was frivolous and vexatious which has resulted in the harassment of the respondents, and that this litigation should have been avoided. The result is that the complaint stands dismissed. The complainant is further ordered to pay cost of Rs. 500/- to the respondent within a period of one month. Complaint dismissed.