Consumer forum jurisdiction over telegraph disputes survives statutory arbitration and service-contract clauses.

Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 provides an additional remedy and does not displace other remedies. Statutory arbitration under section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 applies only to disputes between the telegraph authority and the person for whose benefit the line, appliance or apparatus was provided; a mere licence under section 4 does not make the licensee a telegraph authority. The existence of an arbitration clause in the service agreement does not by itself oust consumer forum jurisdiction. A consumer complaint concerning telegraph services was therefore maintainable before the District Forum.

---

---

Issues: Whether a consumer complaint concerning telegraph services was barred by section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, and whether the existence of a licence or arbitration agreement ousted the jurisdiction of the consumer forum under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Analysis: Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 provides an additional remedy and does not operate in derogation of other laws. The statutory arbitration under section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 is attracted only where the dispute is between the telegraph authority and the person for whose benefit the line, appliance or apparatus has been provided. A licensee under section 4 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 is not, by that fact alone, a telegraph authority within section 3(6). The mere existence of an arbitration clause in the service agreement does not bar recourse to the consumer forum.

Conclusion: The consumer complaint was maintainable before the District Forum, and the order dismissing it as barred by section 7B could not stand.

---