JUDGMENT - Justice G.G. LONEY, President :—This is a usual complaint regarding the deficiency in the service of M.T.N.L. The complainant was granted a Telephone connection under OYT Category on 2-4-1990. The complainant had mentioned correct address in his application dated 27-7-1985. According to the complainant, the service of the opposite party, M.T.N.L. was deficient to the extent that "on 24-6-1991, his telephone No. 6061366 was disconnected without notice and without giving him original bill." It is further alleged by the complainant that although he had given a correct address of his residence, the M.T.N.L. went on changing the address of the complainant as a result of which he was not served with the proper notice. The complainant, therefore, claimed a compensation of Rs. 1,45,000/- and also the costs. The opposite party filed its written version in the month of March, 1992, and denied the allegations made by the complainant. 2. We have heard Shri P.G. Shahapurkar, Advocate for the complainant and Shri Rajguru, Advocate for the Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. The fact of grant of telephone to the complainant and its disconnection dated 24-6-1991 is not disputed. After hearing the arguments and going through the record, we notice the following deficiencies in the service of the M.T.N.L. 1) Disconnection dated 26-6-1991 of the Telephone connection was without notice. 2) No telephone bills about the arrears were given to the complainant. 3) The communication made by the M.T.N.L. with complainant shows different address than the one which was mentioned in his application dated 27-7-1985. The complainant's correct address is as under : "Jaswant Desai, Ground Floor, Khot Bunglow, Janmejay Chabildas Wadi, Factory Lane Corner, L.T. Road, Borivali (w) Bombay." But in the communication to the complainant, in Ex. 'D', the following address is shown. "M/s. Pragnesh Enterprise Jaswant Desai, Factory Lane, L.T. Road, Khot Bunglow, Boriwali (w), Bombay." 4) Telephone directory was not supplied to the complainant. 5) Demanded telephone bills without sending him the original bills. 3. In support on his contentions, as regards the deficiencies mentioned above, the complainant has placed on record documents at Ex. 'A' to 'K'. The complainant has also pointed out other deficiencies in the working of the M.T.N.L. as regards the under ground cable faults etc. 5) Demanded telephone bills without sending him the original bills. 3. In support on his contentions, as regards the deficiencies mentioned above, the complainant has placed on record documents at Ex. 'A' to 'K'. The complainant has also pointed out other deficiencies in the working of the M.T.N.L. as regards the under ground cable faults etc. As regards the aforesaid deficiency, there was no satisfactory explanation given by the M.T.N.L. In any case, we find that the disconnection of the complainant's telephone dated 24-6-1991 was without valid notice and without submitting original telephone bills. In view of these facts, we find that the disconnection of the complainant's telephone without proper notice and without submitting him the original bills was patently wrong. We, therefore, find that having found that there was serious deficiencies described above in the service of the opposite party, the complainant has suffered inconvenience and loss of telephone facility. 4. The complainant has claimed Rs. 1,45,000/- as the amount of compensation and also the cost of the complaint. We find that although the complainant has successfully established the case of deficiency in the service of the opposite party, his claim for compensation is imaginary and excessive. No evidence has been led by the complainant to show the loss suffered by him. In absence of material on record. As regards the loss suffered by the complainant, we would like to grant to the complainant a token amount of compensation of Rs. 5,000/-. Hence, we pass the following order : ORDER 5. The complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) towards — compensation and costs of Rs. 1,000 (Rupees one thousand). Complaint allowed. *****