Rajasthan

StateCommission

A/1416/2015

J.V.V.N.Ltd.through Secretary - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bhagchand Yadav s/o Ramniwas - Opp.Party(s)

Arun Sharma

29 Feb 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR BENCH NO.1

 

FIRST APPEAL NO: 1416 /2015

 

Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., through Secretary, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur.

Vs.

Bhagchand Yadav s/o Ramniwas Yadav r/o Mukam Post Kheri Milk Via Renwal Distt. Jaipur.

 

Date of Order 29.2.2016

 

Before:

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Nisha Gupta- President

Hon'ble Mr,K.K.Bagri- Member

Mr. Kailash Soyal -Member

 

Mr. Arun Sharma counsel for the appellant

 

BY THE STATE COMMISSION ( PER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NISHA GUPTA,PRESIDENT):

 

This appeal has been filed against the judgment of the

learned DCF, Jaipur 2^nd dated 8.10.2015 .

2

 

The short facts of the case are that the complainant -respondent applied for electricity connection. Estimate was prepared and demand notice was issued to him and complainant had deposited Rs. 3700/- on 15.4.2009. Thereafter he has been denied connection on the ground that impugned site is at the distance of 677 meters from the DP and as per rules where the distance is more than 500 meters the connection cannot be issued. The court below has allowed the complaint in favour of the respondent. Hence, this appeal.

 

The contention of the appellant is that earlier the complainant-respondent has asked for connection at a particular place and when they went at the place it was some different place which was at the distance of 677 meters hence, the connection has not been issued.

 

Per contra the contention of the respondent is that as per the estimate the distance between the DP and the site was only 460 meters and he has wrongly been disallowed the connection.

 

Heard the counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned judgment .

 

3

The court below has rightly held that even job order was issued in the matter for putting line for 460 meters and demand notice was issued to the respondent and prior to it site inspection was made by the Junior Engineer in which distance between two places was found to be 460 meters. Thereafter the appellant has come with a new case that earlier DP was at the house of Sitaram Yadav which was shifted to other place hence, the distance has increased. This was not the case of the appellant before the court below that the respondent is asking connection on a different place. Hence, a contradictory defence has been taken by the appellant before the court below and before this court.

 

Admittedly demand notice was issued after measuring distance between two places as 460 meters and thereafter connection has been denied wrongly. The court below has rightly held that it was deficiency on the part of the appellants. There is no merit in this appeal and the appeal is liable to be rejected.

 

(Kailash Soyal) (K.K.Bagri) (Nisha Gupta )

Member Member President

 

nm