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.189/2015
SMT. SHILPA,
W/O SH. PRAVEEN KUMAR
R/O H.NO.4, M.S. BLOCK,
RANAJI ENCLAVE,
NEW DELHI
…………. COMPLAINANT
VS.
- M/S BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD.,
BSES BHAWAN, NEHRU PLACE,
NEW DELHI-110019
THROUGH ITS DGM
- BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD.,
66, KV GRID/STN HARI NAGAR,
OPPOSITE DEEN DAYAL UPADHAYA HOSPITAL,
NEW DELHI
…………..RESPONDENTS
Date of Order: 12.05.2016
O R D E R
A.S. Yadav – President
The case of the complainant is that she is a registered consumer of electricity and regularly paying the electricity bills. However, few day ago the employees of OP met with the husband of complainant and asked for some money which he flatly refused to give. Upon this they threatened husband of complainant for implicating him in some false case of electricity. After sometime a bill for a sum of Rs.63,226/- was received by complainant. Complainant and her husband contacted the office of OP where again the money was demanded which husband of complainant refused. Thereafter complainant received electricity bill of Rs.3,35,237/- in the name of her husband regarding the property in question though her husband has nothing to do with the electricity connection as the same is in her name. It is prayed that OP be directed to withdraw the electricity bills stated above and to pay Rs.1 lakh for compensation and Rs.21,000/- for litigation charges.
OP has moved an application for rejection of the complaint stating therein that it is a case of theft of electricity. Reply to this application was not filed by complainant. In fact nobody appeared for complainant.
We have gone through the record. The perusal of the electricity bills, placed on record by complainant herself, shows that they are pertaining to direct theft of electricity and the same has been committed by Mr. Praveen Kumar, husband of complainant though the registered consumer is complainant. Since it is a case of direct theft of electricity, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.
The matter in question is covered under the judgment of 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.
Keeping in view the above facts, complainant is not a consumer hence the 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) (A.S. YADAV)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
