Ms. Rumnita Mittal, Member—The District Forum II, has decided two complaints No. 886/98 entitled Sh. Manmohan Sethi v. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., and No. 887/98 entitled Smt. Mohini Sethi v. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., vide a common order dated 9.6.1998. Aggrieved by the said order, MTNL (hereinafter referred to as ‘the appellant’), has filed the present two appeals. Since both these appeals are interrelated, we will dispose them of together by this order.

2. The facts common to both the appeals, in brief are, that telephone No. 6868081 was installed at premises No. 28, Qutab View Apartments, New Delhi, in the name of Smt. Mohini Sethi, (respondent in Appeal No. A-438/98). The said telephone was provided with STD facility since the date of installation i.e. 28.4.1990. It is the case of Smt. Mohini Sethi, that she was abroad from 16.6.1990 to 6.11.1991, and on her return to India she found her telephone disconnected on account of non-payment of bills. She obtained a copy of the bill dated 19.9.1991 for Rs. 40,397/-. Since, the details of the calls made during the period mentioned in the bill were not provided therein, her husband, Sh. Manmohan Sethi, (respondent in Appe