Complainant Darbara Singh has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (for short, C.P.Act.) seeking necessary directions to the opposite parties to install the electric connection in his premises. Opposite parties be further directed to pay Rs.50,000/- for damages due to mental agony and physical harassment and Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.

2.        The case of the complainant in brief is that he has applied for getting the new electric connection and deposited the fees to the opposite party No.4 vide two different receipts on 6.6.2012. First receipt is of Rs.300/- and second receipt is of Rs.1,000/-. As per receipts, he was allotted Khata No.3000297885 and as such he is consumer of the opposite parties. He has further pleaded that he is in possession of the house situated at village Abul Khair for which he wants to install the electric connection. In spite of number of requests made to the opposite parties No.2 to 4 for installing the new electric connection but till date no electric connection was installed. The opposite parties are violating the terms, rules and regulations of the electricity manual for not installing the electric connection which is clear cut deficiency in service due to the illegal act and conduct, he and his family members are suffering mental loss, agony and physical harassment. Hence this complaint.

3.       Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite parties who appeared through their counsel and filed their written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the complainant has filed the instant false and frivolous complaint against the opposite parties, which is having no merits at all; the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands  and concealed the material facts from this Forum; the present complaint is not maintainable in the present form and this Forum has got no jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint, since the property over which the complainant is alleging to get installed the Electric Connection is disputed one and the dispute qua the said property is pending before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. On merits, it was submitted that the complainant has applied for getting new Electric connection and in this regard he has deposited the requisite fee with the opposite parties. After thorough investigation, the notice was issued to the complainant and complainant was asked to deposit the outstanding defaulting amount being outstanding against the place where the complainant wants to install new electric connection. It has also been informed to the complainant that on the place where the complainant wants to install new Electric meter, there is already an Electric meter in existence, so necessary attested Affidavit in this regard is being demanded by the opposite parties from the complainant. It was further submitted that where the complainant want to have the electric meter, the said place is Ahata and the same comes under the Road and as such the NOC from the competent authority is being demanded by the opposite parties from the complainant. It was also requested to the complainant by the opposite parties to submit NOC from the Pollution Control Board and the information is also being sought from the complainant by the opposite parties for the main/sole reason of non installation of electric meter qua the factum that where the complainant wants to get installed electric connection there is Status Quo Order of the said place passed by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh and the same litigation is pending in the Hon’ble High Court Chandigarh. All these clarifications have been demanded by the opposite parties from the complainant and asked to the complainant to remove/rectify the said mistakes within 7 days from the date of issuance of notice, but the complainant was failed to do the needful in the matter in hand. Thereafter another notice bearing Memo No.1627 dated 19.12.2013 was again issued by the opposite parties to the complainant regarding the matter in hand, but of no use. As such the opposite parties have not released the electric connection in favour of the complainant as they are unable to release the electric connection in the absence of the documents which the complainant was liable to deposit the same and in the light of the litigation pending between the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh, the opposite parties cannot release the electric connection in favour of the complainant. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

4.      Complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C1, alongwith other documents Ex.C2 and Ex.C3 and closed the evidence. 

5.       Counsel for the opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Harmanpreet Singh Gill S.D.O. Ex.OP1 alongwith other documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP-5 and closed the evidence.

6.     We have thoroughly examined the available evidence on the records so as to interpret the meaning and purpose of each document and also the scope of adverse inference for of some documents ignored to be produced by the contesting litigants against the back-drop of the arguments as put forth by the learned counsels of the present contestants. We find that the present dispute has arisen on account of failure of the OP Corporation/Service providers to release/ install the Domestic Electric Connection (to the complainant) till the filing of the complaint although having duly received/accepted the Misc. Security Deposits (Ex.C2) of Rs.1,000/- and Rs.300/- aggregating to Rs. 1,300/- as on 06.06.2012 towards the release of proposed connection # 3000297885, at the complainant’s residence. Somehow, we do not accept the OP’s explanation (as made out in its written statement and the accompanying affidavit Ex.OP1) that the Connection could not be released since i) the Residential House had been a disputed property with continuing subjudice litigation at the honorable Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh; ii) there has been one continuing electric connection at the proposed house site and iii) the site comprises an ‘Ahata’ in its premises necessitating the submission of the requisite NOCs. The OP Corporation has not produced any cogent evidence to support the above allegation and in its absence these amount to ‘bald’ statements with no evidentiary value etc. The OPs have also failed to produce any applicable procedures/rules/regulations etc framed to be followed in such-like situational cases. Further, the OP Corporation being a Government Undertaking represents the ‘State’ and could have lawfully adopted the preferred ‘circumvention’ or ‘pass-through’ options in accordance with the framed ‘guidelines’ on the subject. Presently, the OP Corporation has virtually/visibly opted to silently sit-over the complainant’s connection for seemingly collateral reason(s) as no cogent-evidence has been put forth revealing any of their ‘earnest’ efforts towards release of the ‘Connection’, in question. We find that the referred ‘court’ case pertains to civil-suit for ‘specific performance’ of sale and possession of ‘agriculture’ land with no relation to the ‘applied for’ electricity connection. Further, the OPs have even failed to produce even the connection no./any evidence of the existing connection and how it bars the release of ‘domestic’ connection for which ‘fee-deposits’ stood accepted a long time back in the year 2012. Similarly, no evidence of the alleged ‘Ahata’ stands produced on records and/or how it bars the proposed release of new connection(s). Lastly, we do not see ‘surfacing’ of any relevance of the OP produced exhibits Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP5 as these do not support/establish the allegations/averments as put forth by the OP service providers. 

7.       On the other hand, the present complainant has repeatedly raised his sufferings and harassment on account of the refusal/non-release of the electricity connection as per his entitlement on flimsy and arbitrary grounds and that also stands successfully proved on records resulting into apparent infringement of his consumer rights. Lastly, it has been impliedly admitted by the OP service providers by reverting to non-rebuttal of the complainant’s charge of non-installation of the power-connection even after having accepted its deposits of security/expenses on 06.06.2012; And, that also proves the ‘unfair trade practice’ coupled with ‘deficiency in service’ on the OP Corporations’ part and thus line-up them liable to an adverse award under the Act. Finally, we are of the considered opinion that the present complainant is entitled to cost & compensation/general damages etc although we are not inclined to award him ‘punitive damages’ as per the discussed narrative, in the aforesaid paragraphs.  

8.       In the light of the all above, we partly allow the present complaint and thus ORDER the Opposite parties to release/install the impugned Domestic Electricity Connection (in right working order) at the complainant’s residence site besides to pay him Rs.5,000/- as cost and compensation within 15 days of the receipt of the copy of these orders. The OP Corporation shall requisition the bare minimum requisites (necessitated, if any for release of domestic connection) from the complainant who shall readily provide the same to enable them to execute compliance of the present orders within the stipulated time-period.

9.        Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to records.

                   (Naveen Puri)

                                                                                      President   

Announced:                                                             (Jagdeep Kaur)

February,03 2016                                                             Member

*MK*