The complainant’s case is as follows: The complainant is a consumer of the respondents vide consumer No.12440. He is running the establishment for the purpose of earning his livelihood by means of self employment. The complainant is issued with a notice dated 28.11.07 to pay Rs.8670/- as additional security deposit. The notice is illegal and without any basis and no details is seen furnished in the notice. Hence the complaint is filed.

            2. The counter is as follows. The Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint since the complainant is not a consumer as provided under Section 2 (1) (d) (i) of the Consumer Protection Act. The bill dated 28.11.07 is issued to pay Rs.8670/- as per Section 47 of the Indian Electricity Act and Section 15 of the Supply code. Hence dismiss the complaint.

 

            3. The points for consideration are:

(1)   Whether the complaint is maintainable?

(2)   Is the complainant liable to pay the Ext. P1 bill amount?

(3)   Other reliefs and costs.

            4. The evidence consists of Ext. P1 only. No other evidence adduced by both.

 

            5. Point No.1: The complainant is a consumer of the respondents vide consumer No.12440. He is issued with Ext. P1 notice to pay Rs.8670/- as additional security deposit. The complainant alleges that Ext. P1 notice is illegal and the complaint is filed. The respondents questioned the maintainability of the complaint on the ground that the complainant is not a consumer as per Section 2 (i) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act. A consumer means a person who buys any goods or for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid or under any system of deferred payment, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose. At the same time ‘commercial purpose’ does not include use by a person of goods bought and used by him and service availed by him exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood, by means of self employment. The complainant has stated in the complaint that he is running the establishment for livelihood by means of self employment and no steps has been taken by the respondents to prove that the complainant is running the establishment for making profit. Hence the complaint found maintainable.

 

            6. Point No.2: The complainant has questioned the Ext. P1 notice. According to him, it is illegal and without any basis. No details have mentioned in the disputed bill. The respondents have stated that the Ext. P1 notice is issued as per Section 47 of the Indian Electricity Act and Section 15 of the Supply Code. As per these sections the respondents can collect an amount equal to three months electricity charges as security deposit. Hence Ext. P1 notice is legally valid. More over the statutory requirement of 30 days time is also allowed to remit the bill amount. So the complainant is liable to pay the Ext. P1 bill amount.

 

            7. In the result, the complaint stands dismissed. The complainant is directed to pay the Ext. P1 bill amount by two consecutive monthly instalments and the first instalment shall pay on or before 15.12.2009.