BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHIWANI
Complaint Case No. 120 of 2018
Date of Institution: 11.09.2018
Date of Decision: 31.05.2022
Smt. Sumitra Devi wife of Shri Sombir, resident of village Bardu Puran, Tehsil Loharu, District Bhiwani.
….Complainant.
Versus
- The Executive Engineer, DHBVN, Bhiwani.
- The SDO DHBVN, Dighawa, Tehsil Loharu, District Bhiwani.
…....Respondents.
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF
THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986
Before: - Sh. Vijay Singh, President.
Mrs. Harisha Mehta, Member.
Present: Sh. Rajender Gera, Advocate for complainant .
Sh. Bijender Sheoran, Advocate for OPs.
ORDER:
Reply to the application dt. 01.12.2019 not filed by complainant. Arguments heard.
Complainant has filed this complaint by invoking provision under Section 12&13 of the Consumer Protection Act, maintaining that electric connection bearing no. B 24BP 21-1117 was installed in his premises by ‘OP’, the bill of the electricity used to pay in time, hence there was nothing due against her but OP no.2 issued a wrong bill for which she visited the office of OPs to get correct the same but no vain. Even a legal notice through counsel was served upon OPs on 29.06.2018 but neither any reply of the notice was given, nor the bill was corrected. Hence this complaint with prayer that complaint of the complainant may kindly be allowed by correcting the electricity bill and Rs.20,000/- may kindly be granted in favour of the complainant towards mental pain, agony, harassment and humilliation etc. and Rs. 5100/- as litigation expenses.
2. Notice of the complainant given to OPs, who opposed the complaint by filing joint written statement stating that complaint deserves to be dismissed as there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and that complainant has not approached this forum with clean hands and has concealed the material facts. 3. On merits it is averred that complainant was found to be involved in theft of electricity, hence this forum has no jurisdiction to decide the present complaint and prayer for dismissal of the same with special cost.
4. We have gone through the complaint and connected documents complainant has no where mentioned the period of bill allegedly send by OPs showing the excessive reading/amount, Even complainant has not stated for which purpose she visited the office of OPs to get correct the bill of which period. Though photocopy of bill bearing account no. B 24BP 21-1117 for the month of May 2018 is attached with complaint but there is nothing about the grievances of the complainant , complainant has not stated even a single word in his evidence that she was never found involved in theft of electricity, whereas OPs have come with a specific plea that it was a case of theft of electricity and thus this Court has no jurisdiction to try and decide the matter.
<>5.Since, it is a case of theft of electricity and Special Electricity Court established under the Electricity Act in each district who has the jurisdiction to decide such type of matters. As this Forum has no jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint which is with respect to theft of electricity, thus the same stands dismissed being not maintainable. Copy of the judgment be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Commission.
Dated: - 31.05.2022
(Harisha Mehta) (Sh. Vijay Singh)
Member. President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Bhiwani.
