Delhi

West Delhi

CC/21/383

JEET SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

BSES - Opp.Party(s)

03 Jan 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUME DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM,

WEST DISTRICT, JANAKPURI,

NEW DELHI

 

CC No.   383/2021

In re:-

JEET SINGH                                                                                          ………..Complainant

 

VERSUS

BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD.                                                  .......... Opposite Party

 

Coram:                                                                                                 

1. SONICA MEHROTRA (PRESIDENT)
2. RICHA JINDAL (MEMBER)
3. ANIL KOUSHAL (MEMBER)

Present: None

Order by – RICHA JINDAL (Member)                                               DATE: 03.01.2022

ORDER

By this complaint, the complainant has prayed as under

1. Declare as null and void the bill dated 29.04.2021 in question raised by the OP being totally illegal, unlawful, illogical, unjustified and against the mandate of law and which is also illegally and unlawfully being demanded by the OP from the complainant
2. Direct the OP to change the meter and send complainant further bill as per the reading in the new meter and also not to disconnect the connection till the decide of the case.
3. Compensate a sum of Rs. 10,000/- to the complainant for the losses suffered by the complainant.
4. Rs. 10,000/- loss of reputation, loss of enjoyment, mental tension, agony, physical suffering etc., in the interest of justice.
5. Opposite party be also directed to pay costs of litigation i.e. Rs. 3,000/- to the complainant.

Briefly stated, the facts leading to seeking the above relief are that the complainant is a registered subscriber of the electricity connection bearing CA No. 40137592 inhis aforementioned property. In the month of the September 2021, the OP raided the house of the complainant for the direct theft case and then the meter of the complainant had been taken by the OP and on that day complainant was forced by the OP to put signature on some papers at the office of the OP at Hari Nagar. On 10.09.2021, the complainant visited the office of the OP for the electricity bill and he was shocked to see the electricity billto the tune of Rs. 3,18,431/-. When he enquired about the exhorbitent bill, he found that the load in the bill wasmuch higher than whatactually the complainant had used. The complainant filed the complaint at the office of the OP which was neverheard by the OP. It is submitted by the complainant that he had filed the previous bill of the same connection which showed the actual load in the connection but to no avail. Thereafter, he approached the OP for making an enquiry into the huge bill generated but despite, making many enquiries no action has been taken by the OP. Therefore, for the inactiveness of the OP and its officials, the complainant had no option left but to file the present complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of OP.

In this connection, we may note the observation made by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “UP Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors. v/s Anish Ahmed in Civil Appeal no 5466 of 2012 (arising out of SLP) © no. 35906 of 2011” as follows:

“The National Commission though held that the intention of the Parliament is not to bar the jurisdiction of the Consumer Forum under the Consumer Protection Act and have saved the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, failed to notice that by virtue of Section 3 of the Consumer protection Act, 1986 or Sections 173,174 and 175 of the Electricity Act, 2003, the Consumer Forum cannot derive power to adjudicate a dispute in relation to assessment made under Section 126 or offences under Sections 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, as the acts of indulging in “unauthorized use of electricity” as defined under Section 126 or committing offence under Sections 135 to 140 do not fall within the meaning of complaint” as defined under Section 2(1)© of the Consumer protection Act, 1986.”

“ The acts of indulging in “unauthorized use of electricity” by a person, as defined in clause (b) of the Explanation below Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 neither has any relationship with “unfair trade practice” or “restrictive trade practice” or “deficiency in service” nor does it amount to hazardous services by the licensee. Such acts of “unauthorized use of electricity” has nothing to do with charging price in excess of the price. Therefore, acts of person in indulging in ‘unauthorised use of electricity’, do not fall within the meaning of “complaint”, as we have noticed above and, therefore, the “complaint” against assessment under Section 126 is not maintainable before the Consumer Forum. The Commission has already notice that the offences referred to in Sections 135 to 140 can be tried only by a Special Court constituted under Section 153 of the Electricity Act, 2003. In that view of the matter also the complaint against any action taken under Sections 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is not maintainable before the Consumer Forum”.

For the foregoing reasons the complaint is dismissed in limine.

A copy of order be sent to the complainant free of cost by post. Order be sent to www.confonet.nic.in.

File be consigned to record room.

 

 

(Richa Jindal)         Member

(Anil Kumar Koushal)               Member

(Sonica Mehrotra)                         President