AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 299 wordsAFTER perusing the records, the Commission delivered the following :
THIS appeal is directed against the Order dated 19.2.1991 passed by the President of District Forum, Belgaum holding that the relief claimed by the appellant herein in his complaint does not come within the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. It arises in this way : - The Appellant is residing at No. 28, Manjunathanagar, Gokul Road, Hubli and the respondent is supplying water to his premises. The Respondent suddenly issued bills for the months of November, 1990, December, 1990and March 1991 to the appellant on the basis that the water was used for non-domestic purpose. As the complaint of the appellant was not looked into by the Respondent, he filed a complaint before the District Forum, Belgaum. The President of the District Forum passed the said order.
Firstly, the order passed by the President alone will not be the order of the Forum as it has got to be signed by all the members constituting it. Hence, the said order cannot be sustained. If the billing is not according to law, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. So the Forum ought to have decided whether the respondent was justified in issuing the bills to the appellant on the basis that the water was being used for non-domestic purpose. That relief can be granted under Section 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. In that view of the matter also, the Order of the President of the District Forum, Belgaum cannot be sustained.
IN the Result, the appeal is allowed and the Order passed by the President, District Forum, is set aside and the matter is remanded to the District Forum, Belgaum for fresh disposal, according to law. Appeal allowed.