Delhi

South Delhi

CC/284/2022

SHRI ARUN MEHRA - Complainant(s)

Versus

BSES RAJDHANI POWER LIMITED - Opp.Party(s)

21 Nov 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II UDYOG SADAN C 22 23
QUTUB INSTITUTIONNAL AREA BEHIND QUTUB HOTEL NEW DELHI 110016
 
Complaint Case No. CC/284/2022
( Date of Filing : 04 Oct 2022 )
 
1. SHRI ARUN MEHRA
FARM NO. 37, KH NO. 121, 122, 123/1 G/F SHAHURPUR NEW DELHI 110074
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. BSES RAJDHANI POWER LIMITED
SAKET DIVISION, BSES RPL, ADHCHINI OFFICE BUILDING NEW DELHI 110017
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  MONIKA A. SRIVASTAVA PRESIDENT
  KIRAN KAUSHAL MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
None
......for the Complainant
 
None
......for the Opp. Party
Dated : 21 Nov 2022
Final Order / Judgement

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi- 110016

 

Case No. 284/2022

 

Sh. Arun Mehra

Farm No.- 37, KH. No.- 121, 122, 123/1,

G/F, Shahurpur, New Delhi- 110074

….Complainant

Versus

 

BSES

Through its CEO

(Saket Division), BSES-RPL,

Adhchini Office Building,

New Delhi- 110017

        ….Opposite Party

    

    Date of Institution    :  30.09.2022   

    Date of Order            : 21.11.2022

 

Coram:

Ms. Monika A Srivastava, President

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

 

ORDER

 

Member: Kiran Kaushal

 

  1. This case is at initial stage.

      Complainant has approached this Commission with prayer to delete, unilaterally adjusted amount of Rs.9,39,155/- from the complainant’s bill and to issue to correct revised bill in respect of CA No.153817132. Additionally, it is prayed that OP be directed to pay Rs.25,000/- compensation towards mental agony and harassment and Rs55,000/- towards cost of litigation.

 

  1. Briefly put, dispute between the parties arose, when BSES (OP)  raised the bill for an amount of Rs.8,89,656/- from the complainant. It is stated by the complainant that the said amount is factually claimed against Farm No.10, Khasra No.137/1, Shahurpur, New Delhi, belonging to Ms. Seema Mehra. It is submitted that the complainant had been timely paying all the electricity bills against electricity CA No. 153817132, which is providing electricity to Farm No.37, Green Mados, Khasra No.121, 122, 123/1, G/F, Shahurpur, New Delhi-74. It is stated that Ms. Seema Mehra has nothing to do with the property of the complainant being Farm No.37. Complainant specifically submits that he is an independent identity and has nothing to do with the claims against Ms. Seema Mehra. It is also stated that OP on 23.09.2022 unlawfully removed the electricity meter, claiming that an amount of Rs.10,00,670/- stands due towards the complainant.

 

  1. On perusal of the documents placed before us it is noticed that notice dated 02.08.2022 was issued to the complainant by OP, wherein it was found that outstanding dues amounting to Rs.8,89,656/- were due and outstanding against electricity CA100085478 registered in the name of Ms. Seema Mehra installed at H.No.37. Khasra No.121, 122, 123/1, G/F, Shahurpur, New Delhi-74. The notice further states that by willful concealment of the facts complainant has obtained another connection CA153817132 illegally at the above noted address without settlement of the outstanding dues against the former connection. As per the ‘Conditions of Supply’ all outstanding dues of electricity on the premises are required to be settled by the applicant of new connection, which is a settled law.

 

  1. Another notice dated 25.08.2022 was issued by OP to the complainant, wherein it is stated that the second notice was issued to the complainant as  per the previous notice dated 02.08.2022  complainant was to show cause for unauthorized receiving of electricity. Therefore, the said dues of Rs.8,89,656/- were transferred to CA No. 153817132 , now in the name of Sh. Arun Mehra. Notice issued by OP makes it clear that in case the complainant wanted to represent against this notice, he should file his objection within ten days of issue of the notice and appear in person or through authorized representative  08.09.2022 at 10.30am at ‘DUES TRANSFER CELL’. Complainant replied to the said notice on 30.08.2022.

 

  1. Apparently, it seems that OP is within its rights to collect the outstanding dues from the complainant. Moreover, it is noticed that the complainant has not filed any outcome to the reply of the notice issued by OP. It is not clear whether the complainant represented himself at the ‘DUES TRANSFER CELL’ and the outcome therein. Complainant is not allowed to agitate the same issue as of now, before this Commission, which is pending before the ‘DUES TRANSFER CELL’.

 

  1. In view of the discussion above the complaint is dismissed in limine.

File be consigned to the record room and order be uploaded on the website.

 

 

 
 
[ MONIKA A. SRIVASTAVA]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ KIRAN KAUSHAL]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.