DAUJI RAM Vs. DELHI VIDYUT BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING dissatisfied with the amount of compensation of Rs. 5,000 and Rs. 1,000 as cost of litigation awarded vide impugned order dated 30.12.1999, passed by the District Forum, on account of deficiency in service on the part of the respondent in not restoring the electricity connection for 18 long months the appellant has directed the appeal.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY , the electricity connection was disconnected in May, 1992 for non -payment of the bill raised by the respondent which later on was found to be highly excessive and illegally raised. However, it was after about 18 months i.e., in October, 1993 the electricity connection was restored on payment of the revised bill. Circumstances of raising revised bill itself shows the deficiency in service on the part of the respondent as defined under Section 2(1)(g) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 which means any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service.

(3.) IN our view, the appellant has not been adequately compensated. In the result, we allow the appeal by enhancing the compensation from Rs.