1. Briefly, the claimant got installed telephone No. 041-8716297, under the post code No.ARRA0408, customer ID No. 104088716297, in his premises at house No. 371/C Peoples Colony No. 2, Ghousia Chowk Faisalabad. The range of the claimant's monthly Bill of above said telephone was within an amount of Rs. 1000/- but he was imposed monthly Bill of Rs. 3530/- on 23.07.08, due to extra Billing.
The claimant lodged a complaint to the PTCL on 08.08.08, for correction of the said Bill and also knocked at the door of NAB but in vain. The claimant's telephone was tossed in the month of August 2008, but he was sent the Bill amounting to Rs. 16270/- for the month of December to his astonishment. Under such circumstances, the claimant has lodged this claim for recovery of an amount Rs. 106000/- due to over Billing, metal tension, loss of business, expenditure in legal process under section 25 of PCPA 2005, due to faulty and defective services of the defendant and his functionaries.
2. The defendant has vehemently opposed this claim by filing his statement of defence, interalia, on the grounds that the issuance of telephone Bills in favour of the claimant was according to actual use as the Billing is totally computerized, that the telephone was tossed (with drawl of out going facility) on 11.08.08, and that the claimant has failed to make the payment of PTCL dues for the period of November 08 to January 09 that, hence, the total outstanding amount against him is Rs. 17760/- that therefore, he has brought this claim falsely in order to avoid the payment.
3. The claimant has supported his version by producing his affidavit EX-PW1/1, and veracity of this document was challenged through cross examination by learned defendant's counsel. Shoukat Ali Assistant General Manager FTR Faisalabad also got recorded his statement as DW1 through his affidavit EX-DW1/1, when he was also subjected to cross examination by the learned claimant's counsel.
4. Heard the arguments. Record perused.
5. From the recitals in the claim as well as facts readily available and ascertainable, it is crystal clear to my entire satisfaction that despite that the claimant's telephone was tossed (temporary out of service/withdrawal of outgoing service) on 11.08.2008,, vide para No. 3 of written statement read with letter No. SRO-ii/FA/87162971 dated 13.02.08 but the claimant was issued Bill for eighteen outgoing calls on 12.08.08, vide computerized record at page No. 45 of judicial file, on the same Mobilink number alleged to have been used by the claimant through out his previous Billing. It is very astonishing and surprising to note that these eighteen calls are also computerized and such fact negates the defendant's version that in his computerized record there is no chance of bogus Billing.
6. From such circumstance, it has been established without any shadow of doubt that the defendant and his functionaries are responsible for providing faulty and defective service to the consumer/claimant as the "defect" in the PCPA 2005, having widest amplitude pertaining to services for the purpose of this statue as this definition is couched in the widest horizon of there being any fault, imperfection or short coming casting its net so wide so to bring it within its import any deviation from the requirements spelled out in the definition related to the quality or standard of services, hence, the definition is to be liberally construed.
7. From the above said scenario, under the above said set of affairs, the court must endeavor to get at that sum of money which will put the claimant, whose legal right has been infringed and has, therefore, suffered, in the same position as he would have been in, if he had not sustained the wrong for which he is getting compensation or reparation. However, such endeavor of the court prevents the claimant from recovering remote damages that do not flow or arise as direct consequence of the wrong ful act.
8. The upshot of the above whole discussion is that the defendant shall now issue fresh Bill of the telephone connection to the claimant with the average Billing of three months prior to the disputed Bill which shall be paid by the claimant within the due date prescribed in such Bill by the defendant.
The claim is hereby disposed of accordingly. File be consigned to the record room after its due completions.