SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

DESH BANDHU AGGARWAL, RUMNITA MITTAL, LOKESHWAR PRASAD
DELHI VIDYUT BOARD – Appellant
Versus
SURAJ BHAN – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Ms. Deepika, Advocate.
For the Respondent: None.

ORDER

Mr. Justice Lokeshwar Prasad, President—The present appeal, filed by the appellant, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), is directed against order dated 26.4.1999, passed by District Forum No.-I in Complaint Case No. 932/96—entitled Shri Suraj Bhan v. The Assistant Finance Officer, DESU & Anr.

2. The facts, relevant for the disposal of the present appeal, briefly stated, are that the respondent filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Act before the District Forum, averring that the respondent had occupied premises, bearing No. 2695, Plot No. 11, Sadar Thana Road, Delhi on rental basis w.e.f. 25.12.1988. As the abovesaid premises, taken on rent, by the respondent, had no electric connection, the respondent applied for an electric connection and a sum of Rs. 750/- was deposited by the respondent with the appellant on 25.1.1989. The case of the respondent, before the District Forum, was that though meter was installed on 16.3.1989 but the respondent did not receive any bill for the consumption of electricity despite repeated request till May, 1996. It was stated that in May, 1996, the respondent received 1st bill for elect












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top