ORDER

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

            This revision petition is treated as an appeal. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 23.06.1994 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun in consumer complaint No. 231 of 1994; Sh. Ved Prakash and others vs. Department of Telecommunication, Dehradun. By the order impugned, the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and directed the opposite party to give rent rebate in respect of telephone No. PNG 285 for a period of twelve months falling between 16.07.1992 to 15.01.1994. The amount of rent rebate shall be adjusted in future bills. The District Forum has also imposed Rs. 3,000/- as compensation and Rs. 500/- as costs on the opposite party-appellant.

2.       Briefly stated the facts of the case, giving rise to the appeal, are that the telephone connection No. PNG 285 was in the name of          Sh. Manohar Lal Anand, father of the complainants. It was alleged in the consumer complaint that the instrument of telephone, which was handed over to the father of the complainants, was defective instrument and after checking it was found that the instrument was a burnt instrument. Thereafter on 25.08.1992, the telephone instrument was replaced but the same was not working.  Even then the bill of rent was sent to the father of the complainants, which was not adjusted, therefore, the consumer complaint was filed by the complainants.

3.       The consumer complaint was contested by the opposite party by filing written statement.

4.       Both the parties have filed their evidence on record. After hearing both the parties, the consumer complaint was decided on 23.06.1994. Aggrieved by the said order, the opposite party-Telecom Department has filed the present appeal.

5.       This appeal has been preferred by the appellant on the ground that the telephone in question is still existed in the name of                Sh. Manohar Lal Anand, father of the complainants, and the telephone has not been transferred in the name of complainants-respondents, hence, the appellant is unable to comply the judgment and order passed by the District Forum.  The compensation, which was awarded by the District Forum, has been given without any reason.

6.       After perusal of the judgment and order passed by the District Forum, we are of the view that the compensation awarded without assigning cogent reasons to be paid to the respondents by the appellant. So far as the rent rebate is concerned, we do not find any error on this issue in the judgment, as the telephone remained out of order for a total period of 12 months.  Therefore, the appeal is partly allowed and the judgment is modified. Order in respect of compensation is liable to be set aside. Rest of the part of the order is maintained.

7        For the reasons aforesaid, the appeal is partly allowed. Impugned judgment and order dated 23.06.1994 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun in consumer complaint No. 231 of 1994 is modified to the above extent. No order as to costs.