IMRAIN HUSAIN filed a consumer case on 29 Aug 2018 against BSES in the West Delhi Consumer Court. The case no is CC/18/329 and the judgment uploaded on 30 Aug 2018.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)
150-151; COMMUNITY CENTER ; C-BLOCK; JANAK PURI; NEW DELHI
CASE NO. 329/18
Imran Husian Rizvi R/o H.No. 6 Om Vihar Phase 4, Uttam Nagar 110059 …….. Complainant
VERSUS
BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. Janakpuri …..Opposite Party.
O R D E R
K.S. MOHI, PRESIDENT
The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The facts as alleged in the complaint are regarding excessive electricity charges to the tune of Rs. 41, 546.11/- sent to the complainant by OP. It has been stated in the complaint that complainant had made complaint to OP for faulty electricity meter which was changed after several reminders given by complainant. The grievance of complainant is that previously he has been receiving normal electricity bill less than Rs. 1000/- but all of a sudden he received electricity bill running in thousands, hence present complaint.
During the course argument the complainant was confronted with the issue as to how he has filed the complaint in the name of Imran Husain Rizvi whereas the electricity bill is in the name Rajdeep Goyal , Brij Bhushan and Sundeep Goyal. The complainant explained that this electricity bill has been sent in the name of the builder. The property in question stand transferred in his name but the electricity connection has not yet been registered in his name.
As a rule a person can approach Consumer Forum if he is able to establish deficiency in service on the part of OP. In the present case OP is not providing any service directly to the complainant and as such a complainant cannot be treated as consumer under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act which reads as under:-
Section 2(1)(d) “consumer” means any person who-
(Explanation- For the purposes of this clause “commercial purpose” does not include use by a person of goods bought and used by him and services availed by him exclusively for the purposes of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment).
The aforesaid definition of consumer make it crystal clear that the consumer is one who avails service of OP and finds deficiency in service . In the circumstances the instant case no service has been provided to the complainant by OP in his individual capacity. Therefore, we are of the opinion that since the complainant is not a consumer within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act , so complaint is dismissed.
Copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules.
File be consigned to the record room.
Announced this___29th ___ day of __August_______ 2018.
( K.S. MOHI ) (PUNEET LAMBA) PRESIDENT MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.