B.C. Kandpal, J. (President) - (1.) THIS is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 22.6.1996 passed by the District Forum, Pauri Garhwal in consumer complaint No. 391 of 1996. By the order impugned, the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and directed the appellant to supply the electricity to the respondent on payment of the bill and also directed that the bills should be sent according to the meter and the appellant should not disconnect the electricity of the respondent on the ground of sanction of additional load of 5.00 KW and notice dated 12.6.1996 was cancelled and the letter dated 13.6.1996 was also cancelled. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the complainant was posted as Assistant Engineer in Public Works Department, Pauri and he was provided Government accommodation by his department consisting of three rooms, one kitchen, one bathroom and latrine. There was sanctioned load of 1.62 KW. It was alleged that on 12.6.1996, the complainant received a notice from the electricity department, whereby he was asked to get the load of 5.00 KW in place of 1.62 KW. On receipt of the alleged notice, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Pauri Garhwal.
(2.) THE District Forum issued notice to the appellant, but the appellant did not appear before the District Forum and hence the District Forum proceeded the consumer complaint ex parte against the appellant and decided the same vide impugned order dated 22.6.1996 in the above manner. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has filed the present appeal. None appeared on behalf of respondent -complainant. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and have also perused the record.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellant submitted that the consumer complaint filed by the complainant was premature, as no notice dated 12.6.1996 was issued by the electricity department. It was argued that on 12.6.1996, checking was made and whereupon, the checking report dated 12.6.1996 was prepared by the checking team and since no notice was issued to the complainant and hence the consumer complaint was not maintainable being premature and could not have been entertained as such by the District Forum.;