Per: Justice B.S. Verma, President (Oral):

Heard Sh. M.K. Kohli, learned counsel for the appellant.  None is present on behalf of the respondent inspite of service through publication.

This appeal filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, is directed against the order dated 23.05.1997 passed by the District Forum, Pauri Garhwal in consumer complaint No. 249 of 1995; Sh. Sunil Kumar Vs. Sub Divisional Officer, Telegraph, Pauri.  By the order impugned, the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and directed the appellant to pay compensation of Rs. 500/- together with litigation expenses of Rs. 100/- to the respondent – complainant within a period of one month, failing which the respondent was also held entitled to interest @15% from the date of filing of the consumer complaint till payment.

The undisputed facts of the case, which reveal from the perusal of the impugned order passed by the District Forum, are that the telephone connection has already been installed at the premises of the complainant and the District Forum has observed in its order that now no grievance of the complainant is left.  Even then, the District Forum has awarded compensation of Rs. 500/- and litigation expenses of Rs. 100/- against the appellant without assigning any reason. 

Since the telephone connection has already been installed at the premises of the complainant, there was no justification on the part of the District Forum to award compensation and litigation expenses against the appellant.  Therefore, the impugned order passed by the District Forum can not legally be sustained and is liable to be set aside.

In view of above, appeal is allowed.  Order impugned dated 23.05.1997 passed by the District Forum is set aside and consumer complaint No. 249 of 1995 is dismissed.  No order as to costs.