Although the present Appeal has been preferred by the Complainant against the order passed by the State Commission on 2.5.2016, dismissing the Complaint in default, but we find that in the first instance, in the light of the authoritative pronouncement of the Supreme Court of India in U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors. vs. Anis Ahmad – (2013)8 SCC 491, the Complaint itself was not maintainable.

       Faced with the situation, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant seeks leave to withdraw the Appeal with liberty to the Appellant to take recourse to an appropriate remedy, as may be available to it in accordance with law, other than filing a fresh Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  He, however, prays that since the Appellant was seeking redressal of its grievance before a wrong Forum, it may be granted the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, and further the Respondents may be directed not to take coercive steps for disconnection of the electricity from the connection in question, till the Appellant initiates fresh proceedings.

       In view of the above, we dismiss the Appeal as also the Complaint, giving rise to the present Appeal, as withdrawn, with liberty to the Appellant to approach an appropriate Forum for redressal of its grievances.  However, we direct that the Respondent shall not disconnect the electricity supply for a period of one month from today in order to enable the Appellant to approach the appropriate Forum.  We are confident that as and when the Appellant resorts to the appropriate remedy along with an application for condonation of delay, the Court concerned shall consider its application for condonation of delay, keeping in view the observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Laxmi Engineering Works vs.PSG Industrial Institute – (1995) 3 SCC 583.

       Order dasti.