Delhi

South II

cc/877/2008

Amar Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

08 Aug 2016

ORDER

Udyog Sadan Qutub Institutional Area New Delhi-16
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. cc/877/2008
 
1. Amar Singh
44-E W No.9 Kishan Garh Mehrauli New Delhi-70
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd
BSES Bhawan Nehru Place New Delhi-19
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S Yadav PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D .R Tamta MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE Ritu Garodia MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 08 Aug 2016
Final Order / Judgement

 CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel)

New Delhi – 110 016

 

Case No.877/2008

     

 

 

SH. AMAR SINGH

S/O LATE SH. GANGA SAHAI

44-E W NO-9, KISHAN GARH, MEHRAULI,

NEW DELHI-110070

…………. COMPLAINANT                                                                                     

 

                                                VS.

 

 

M/S BSES, RAJDHANI POWER LIMITED,

THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,

BSES BHAWAN, NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI

 

      …………..RESPONDENT

 

 

                                                                                             Date of Order:08.08.2016

 

O R D E R

 

A.S. Yadav – President

 

The case of the complainant is that he was having three electricity connections detailed below in the aforesaid premises out of which, two connections were sanctioned for non-domestic purposes and one connection i.e. K.No.25210A090071 (DX) was sanctioned for domestic purpose:-

                        K.Nos.                                   Meter No.      S/L

  1. K.No.25210A090071 (DX)             27109403      11 KW
  2. K.No.2521G7102031 (DX)             22448613      5 KW
  3. K.No.2521G7101182 (DX)             24140794      3 KW

 

 

 

It is stated that on 04.03.2008 officials of OP came to the premises of the complainant for replacing the mechanical meters with the electronic meters and demanded money and when complainant refused to pay illegal gratifications, these officials of OP called certain officials who claimed themselves to be from the Enforcement Team of the OP and took certain photographs and they also demanded money.  Complainant asked for their identify thereafter these persons left with a threat and subsequently complainant was shocked to receive impugned notice dated 04.03.2008 u/s 126 of the Electricity Act 2003 for unauthorized use of electricity alongwith load report and meter details.  It is submitted that alleged inspection report is fabricated and malafide.  OP has not provided any details and photographs taken at the time of inspection.  The son of the complainant attended the personal hearing at the office of the OP on 20.03.2008 and tried to apprise officials of OP that there was no misuse of electricity connection bearing K.No.25210A090071.  OP ignored the aforesaid submissions made by the son of the complainant and raised impugned assessment bill for tariff violation dated 30.08.2008 amounting to Rs.1,70,073/- with due date 11.09.2008.  In order to force the payment of aforesaid illegal demand, the OP further sent the Disconnection Notice u/s 56 of Electricity Act on 12.11.2008.  The said bill was assessed for the period of 05.03.2007 to 22.08.2008 i.e. more than 17 months.  It is submitted that the said impugned bills is further against section 126(iii)(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003 which provides that:-

 

“if the assessing officer after reaches to the conclusion that unauthorized use of electricity has taken place, the assessment shall be made for the entire period during which such unauthorized use of electricity has taken place and if however, the period during which such unauthorized use of electricity cannot be ascertained, such period shall be limited to a period of twelve month immediately preceding the date of inspection”

It is prayed that OP be directed to restrain the disconnection of electricity supply of the connection bearing K.No.25210A090071(DX) and quash the bill amounting to Rs.1,70,073/- and inspection report as well as load report dated 04.03.2008 and OP also be directed to pay Rs.1 lakh for compensation and Rs.25,000/- for litigation cost.

 

OP in the reply took the plea that the case pertains to unauthorized use of electricity.  It is submitted that an inspection was carried at the premises of the complainant by Authorized Enforcement Team on 04.03.08 where connection bearing No.2521 0A090071 having sanction load of 11 KW under Domestic Category was found being used for Non-Domestic purpose unauthorizedly by Sh. Surender for running a Provisional Store.  Meter report vide M.R. No.7171 and Load Report vide L.R. No.1955 dated 04.03.08 were prepared at the site.  Accordingly, based on the said irregularities, the Show Cause Notice regarding unauthorized use of electricity u/s 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 was issued on 04.03.08 with the request to attend the Personal Hearing on 15.03.08.  In reply to Show Cause Notice, Sh, Surender Singh s/o the complainant attended the Personal Hearing on 20.03.08 and submitted before the Assessing Officer that he has been occupying the premises for a long time. 

 

Keeping in view all the facts and outcome of Personal Hearing, it was found that the meter sanctioned under Domestic category was being used for Non-Domestic purposes.  Further, another non-Domestic connection 2521 G710 0082 was also found in the premises but only two lamps were found connected on that meter.  All other Non-Domestic load was found connected on the meter No.27109403 which was sanctioned under Domestic Category.  Accordingly, a Speaking Order for raising Assessment Bill for unauthorized use of electricity u/s 126 of Electricity Act, 2003 was passed on 28.03.08.  On the basis of the said Speaking Order dated 28.03.08 and as per the provisions of Tariff and DERC Regulations and Section 126 of the Electricity Act 2003, DFO(Enf) raised Assessment Bill dated 30.08.08 for unauthorized use of electricity amounting to Rs.1,70,073/- with due date of 11.09.2008.  It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

 

We have heard Ld. Counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record.

 

It is not in dispute that the show cause notice was issued to the complainant and the complainant appeared before the appropriate authority and a appropriate authority passed speaking order.  It is settled law that in case of direct theft of electricity this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors. Vs Anis Ahmed, 111(2013) CPJ 1(SC) where it was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that person who is found indulging in theft of electricity is not a consumer within the meaning of Consumer Protection Act. 

 

Since this a case of theft of electricity, in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court and National Commission, complainant is not a consumer.  Hence complaint is dismissed.

 

            Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.

 

 

 

     (D.R. TAMTA)                     (RITU GARODIA)                        (A.S. YADAV)

        MEMBER                               MEMBER                                  PRESIDENT

 

           

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S Yadav]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D .R Tamta]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE Ritu Garodia]
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.