Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. Vs. Brij Bhushan Gupta - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1114361
CourtDelhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided OnJan-03-1994
Case NumberAppeal No. 552 of 1993
JudgeR.N. MITTAL PRESIDENT; THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S. BRAR MEMBER & THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE DR. A.N. SAXENA, MEMBER
AppellantMahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.
RespondentBrij Bhushan Gupta
Excerpt:
consumer protection act, 1986 - section 17 - cases referred: rp no. 606/93 in op no. 284 of 93 decided on 1.10.93 by ncdrc. rp no. 498 of 1993 decided on 19.10.93 by ncdrc. comparative citations: 1994 (1) clt 528, 1994 (3) cpj 291r.n. mittal, president: 1. this revision petition has been filed against the interim order dated 11-11-93 directing the appellant (opposite party) to restore the telephone, in case, the complainant (respondent) deposits 25% of the amount of the bill. the national commission has held in ak virmani v. d.e.s.u. (revision petition no. 606/93 in o.p. no. 284 of 1993 decided on 1st october, 1993) that the prayer for interim relief under the consumer protection act can not be granted. similar observations have been made by the national commission in m.c.d. (d.e.s.u.) v. mohinder singh verma (revision petition no. 498 of 1993 decided on 19-10-93). 2. in view of the above said observations we accept the revision petition and set-aside the order of the district forum. the parties are directed to complete the pledings and evidence etc. before the next date, so that the case may be disposed of on that date. if the parties complete the pleadings etc. it will be appropriate that the case be disposed of on the next date of hearing. revision accepted.
Judgment:

R.N. Mittal, President:

1. This revision petition has been filed against the interim order dated 11-11-93 directing the appellant (Opposite Party) to restore the telephone, in case, the complainant (respondent) deposits 25% of the amount of the bill. The National Commission has held in AK Virmani v. D.E.S.U. (Revision Petition No. 606/93 in O.P. No. 284 of 1993 decided on 1st October, 1993) that the prayer for interim relief under the Consumer Protection Act can not be granted. Similar observations have been made by the National Commission in M.C.D. (D.E.S.U.) v. Mohinder Singh Verma (Revision Petition No. 498 of 1993 decided on 19-10-93).

2. In view of the above said observations we accept the revision petition and set-aside the order of the District Forum. The parties are directed to complete the pledings and evidence etc. before the next date, so that the case may be disposed of on that date. If the parties complete the pleadings etc. it will be appropriate that the case be disposed of on the next date of hearing.

Revision accepted.