Punjab

Faridkot

CC/17/57

AJAIB SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

CHAIRMAN PSPCL - Opp.Party(s)

Ranjit Singh

17 Aug 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

Complaint No :        57

Date of Institution : 1.03.2017

Date of Decision :   17.08.2017

Ajaib Singh aged about 76 years s/o Malook Singh r/o village Sukhan Wala, Tehsil and District Faridkot 98789-34903.

                                                                 ......Complainant

Versus

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., through Chairman cum Managing Director, The Mall, Patiala.
2.  Assistant Executive Engineer  D S Sub Division, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.  Sadiq.                                   

                     ......Ops

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum: Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President,

                Sh P Singla, Member.

 

Present: Sh Ranjit Singh, Ld Counsel for complainant,

    Sh Rajneesh Garg, Ld Counsel for OPs.

 

ORDER

 (Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                           Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd etc/Ops seeking directions to Ops to provide proper electricity by installing electric pole and to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- for harassment and mental agony suffered by complainant besides litigation expenses of Rs.15,000/- to complainant.

2                                         Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that electric connection bearing a/c no SK-87/0626 is running in the name of son of complainant and being beneficiary, complainant is using the same and has been paying all the bills as and when received. It is submitted that against bill dt 7.04.2016 complainant paid Rs.10,000/-in advance. Further submitted that supply to his connection is being supplied from distance of about 650 feet. Cable wires leading to connection have been damaged and moreover, no electric pole is installed for providing power and therefore, proper supply is not made to his connection. Despite repeated requests by complainant, OPs have not replaced the damaged cable and have also not installed pole nearby. Under compelling circumstances, complainant purchased cable worth Rs.3200/- and supporting wire worth Rs.1040/- by paying from his own pocket and got the same installed through employees of OPs, but despite this, supply is not being provided to his connection as per rules. Complainant has made several requests to Ops to install a pole for proper supply of power to their place, but all in vain. All this act and conduct of Ops has caused great inconvenience, harassment and mental tension to complainant for which he has prayed for seeking directions to Ops to install the pole and to provide proper electricity to their premises and also prayed for compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him besides litigation expenses. Hence, this complaint.

3                                        Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dt 7.03.2017, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.

4                                 On receipt of the notice, the opposite parties filed written statement taking preliminary objections that OPs have constituted various Dispute Settlement Committees to settle the dispute between the parties, but complainant has not put his case before such committee and therefore, this complaint is liable to be dismissed and moreover, complainant does not fall under the definition of consumer and there is no privity of contract between complainant and Ops and thus, complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. However, on merits, ld counsel for OPs have denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being incorrect and wrong and asserted that there is no privity of contract between complainant and Ops. There is no problem in connection and supply is normal. At the time of issuance of connection, site was duly checked and as per report of concerned JE, there is no requirement  to put the pole for supply of energy. Only 8 meters wire was required and that has already been put at site. No pole is required to be installed. There is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops and all the other allegations levelled by complainant have been refuted with a prayer to dismiss the complaint.  

5                                     Parties were given proper opportunities        to produce evidence to prove their respective case. Counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavits of complainant Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2  to  C-4 and closed the same.

6                                 In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, the opposite parties tendered in evidence affidavit of Balwinder Singh as Ex OP-1 and document Ex OP-2 and then, closed the evidence.

7                                              We have heard the ld counsel for complainant as well as Ops and have carefully gone through the evidence produced on file.

8                                               Ld Counsel for complainant argued that son of complainant lives abroad and therefore, being beneficiary, complainant is using the same and has been paying all the bills. Even on 7.04.2016 complainant paid bill for Rs.10,000/-in advance.  It is submitted that supply to his connection is being supplied from distance of about 650 feet. Cable wires leading to connection have been damaged and moreover, no electric pole is installed for providing power and therefore, proper supply is not made to his connection. Despite repeated requests by complainant, OPs have not replaced the damaged cable and have also not installed pole nearby. Under compelling circumstances, complainant purchased cable worth Rs.3200/- and supporting wire worth Rs.1040/- and got the same installed through employees of OPs, but despite this, proper supply is not being provided to his connection as per rules. Complainant has made several requests to Ops to install a pole for proper supply of power to their place, but all in vain, which amounts to deficiency in service and has caused great harassment and mental tension to complainant for which he has prayed for seeking directions to Ops to install the pole and to provide proper electricity to their premises. Complainant has prayed for accepting the complaint alongwith compensation and litigation expenses.

9                                               Ld Counsel for Ops argued before the Forum that OPs have constituted various Dispute Settlement Committees to settle the dispute between the parties, but complainant has not put his case before such committee and therefore, this complaint is liable to be dismissed and moreover, complainant does not fall under the definition of consumer and thus, complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. OPs have denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being incorrect and wrong and asserted that there is no privity of contract between complainant and Ops. There is no problem in connection and supply is normal. At the time of issuance of connection, site was duly checked and as per report of concerned JE, there is no requirement to put the pole for supply of energy. Only 8 meters wire was required and that has already been put at site. No pole is required to be installed. It is reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Prayer for dismissal of complaint is made.

10                                            The case of the complainant is that being beneficiary he is using the electric connection installed in the name of his son and is paying all the charges regularly. Grievance of complainant is that the supply of power to his connection is not proper as no pole is installed to provide the supply and even wires connecting his premises to main supply are also damaged. Supply to his connection is being supplied from distance of about 650 feet. Complainant purchased cable worth Rs.3200/- and supporting wire worth Rs.1040/- by paying from his own pocket and got the same installed through employees of OPs, but despite this, proper supply is not being provided to his connection as per rules. Repeated requests made by complainant to Ops to install a pole for proper supply of power to their place, bore no fruit, which amounts to deficiency in service. In reply, OPs admitted that there is an electric connection installed in the premises of complainant but stressed mainly on the point that power supply to his connection is normal and there is no requirement for installing the pole.

11                                 We have thoroughly gone through the file and evidence led by parties and from the careful perusal of documents placed on record, it is observed that bill Ex C-3 and Ex C-4 are sufficient to prove the pleading of complainant that supply to his connection was not proper and he himself purchased the material and got installed the same from the employees of Ops. Ex C-2 /copy of receipt dt 7.04.2016 also proves the pleading of complainant that he paid Rs.10,000/-to OPs in advance of the bill. There is no reason to doubt the allegation of complainant that supply to his connection is not proper. Had to supply to his electric connection was proper, there would have no need to complainant to purchase cable wire and supporting wire from his own pocket. Allegations of complainant that  supply to his connection is being supplied from distance of about 650 feet and cable wires leading to connection have been damaged seem  genuine. There is deficiency in service on the part of OPs in not erecting pole despite repeated requests by complainant. Therefore, complaint in hand is hereby allowed. Ops are directed to provide proper supply of power to the connection of complainant and to erect a pole and make sufficient arrangement, if  necessary at the spot for proper supply of power to avoid any further inconvenience to him. Compliance of this order be made within one month of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which complainant shall be entitled to proceed under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 17.08.2017

                  

Member                                  President  

 (P Singla)                      (Ajit Aggarwal)