JUDGMENT K.C. Bhargava, President : This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 23.1.2001 passed by District Consumer Forum, Basti in Complaint Case No. 592/1994. 2. The facts of the case stated in brief are that the complainant had taken an electricity connection in the year 1958 for running flour mill. The complainant closed this business on account of old age and applied for disconnection on 6.12.1993, after depositing a sum of Rs. 100/-. The electricity was not disconnected and the bills are coming in the name of the complainant at the rate of Rs. 700/- per month. The complainant has prayed for quashing of the bill. 3. The opposite party did not file any written statement even after taking adjournments on 13 occasions and cost of Rs. 20/- which was imposed by the District Forum on account of grant of adjournments was also not paid. 4. The learned District Forum, after considering the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the complainant had applied for disconnection as alleged, hence it found that there was deficiency on the part of the appellant and directed for quashing of the bills issued after 26.12.1993 and awarded a sum of Rs.1,000/- as cost. 5. Aggrieved against this order, the opposite party, U.P Power Corporation Limited has come in appeal and has challenged the correctness of the order passed by learned District Forum. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that adequate opportunity was not given to the appellant to contest the case. According to the learned counsel, the disconnection was done in November, 1994. 7. As seen in the earlier part of the judgment, the appellant had taken 13 adjournments but failed to file the written statement. Even the cost of the adjournment was not paid. Thus no defence was put up by the appellant before the learned District Forum. Now according to the learned Counsel for the appellant, the disconnection has been done in November, 1994 but no reason has been shown as to why this disconnection of the electricity was not done in the year 1993 when the complainant had applied for the same. Thus no defence was put up by the appellant before the learned District Forum. Now according to the learned Counsel for the appellant, the disconnection has been done in November, 1994 but no reason has been shown as to why this disconnection of the electricity was not done in the year 1993 when the complainant had applied for the same. Thus, the facts on record clearly go to show that there is a deficiency In service on behalf of the appellant and the learned District Forum was perfectly justified in decreeing the claim of the complainant. The appeal is, therefore, liable to be dismissed. ORDER The appeal is dismissed. This judgment and order of the learned District Forum are confirmed. The appellant shall pay a sum of Rs. 2,000/- as cost to the complainant. Let compliance of this order be made within a period of two months from the• date of this order. Let copy of this order be made available to the parties as per rules.