Complainant Gurnam 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 restore his electricity supply to the electric connection of Atta Chakki bearing Account No.GP-82/10 and to change the ownership of the Atta Chakki in his name. Opposite parties be further directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for  harassment, in the interest of justice.

2.        The case of the complainant in brief is that his father has got installed an electric connection bearing Account No.GP-82/10 in his Atta Chakki for self employment and for earning his livelihood. During the life time of his father namely Kartar Singh, he was using the said Atta Chakki and after his demise he has been using the said Atta Chakki and has been making payment of the electricity charges to the opposite parties no.1 to 4 without any default and the last payment of the bill was made by him on 21.8.2015. He has further pleaded that there is dispute between him and opposite parties no.5 to 9 qua the landed property being left by their father. The opposite parties no.5 and 7 who are his brothers have been retired from Punjab State Power Corporation Limited. The said opposite parties no.5 and 7 in order to cause irreparable loss to him and to put pressure upon him not to raise any dispute qua the landed property being left by Kartar Singh, they have moved false and frivolous application to the opposite parties no.1 to 4 that the electric connection of the Atta Chakki would be disconnected. Thereafter in order to please the opposite parties no.5 and 7, the opposite parties no.1 to 4 have issued illegal notice bearing memo no.126 dated 13.5.2010. He has also installed another electric connection bearing Account No.G64PF34107N at his residential accommodation. He has number of times requested the opposite parties no.1 to 4 to change his name in the electric connection and even has completed all the formalities in this regard, but the opposite parties have refused to do so. He has next pleaded that against the illegal threat of the opposite parties no.1 to 4, he has filed suit for permanent Injunction against the opposite parties no.1 to 4 to the effect that they be restrained from disconnecting his electric connection installed in the Atta Chakki. The said suit was pending in the Court of Sh.Ravi Pal Singh, Civil Judge (Junior Division) Gurdaspur which was dismissed. On 25.8.2015, the officials of the opposite parties no.1 to 4 have visited the site and disconnected the electricity supply to the electric meter installed in the Atta Chakki. The act of the opposite parties to disconnect the electricity supply to his electric connection in the Atta Chakki is illegal, null and void. Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  Hence this complaint.

3.          Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite parties no.1 to 4 who appeared through their counsel and filed their written reply taking the preliminary objections that the complainant has filed the false and frivolous complaint; the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hand; the present complaint is not maintainable in the present Forum and the complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint. On merits, it was submitted that Jassa Singh, Mula Singh, Sucha Singh, Surjit Singh, Satnam Singh sons of Kartar Singh residents of village Karwal, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur moved an application to the opposite parties on 20.4.2010 for the disconnection of the electric connection of Atta Chakki bearing Account No.GP-82/10. In this application the abovesaid applicants stated that the electric connection of Atta Chakki was got by his father but his brother Gurnam Singh running the electric Atta Chakki without any right, title or interest. After that the opposite parties no.1 to 4 issued a memo No.37 dated 26.4.2010 to the complainant and directed the complainant to file the no objection certificate/affidavit of the other co sharers. Again on 12.5.2010 Mula Singh son of Kartar Singh moved an application regarding the disconnection of the abovesaid Atta Chakki bearing Account No.GP-82/10. The applicant also produced the copy of death certificate of Kartar Singh who was the real consumer of the opposite parties no.1 to 4 and photocopy of mutation. Hence the opposite parties no.1 to 4 again issued memo no.126 dated 13.5.2010 to the complainant for producing the no objection certificate of the other co sharer within 5 days, whereas the complainant did not produce any document to the opposite parties no.1 to 4, inspite of memo no.37 dated 26.4.2010. The complainant filed a Civil Suit which was dismissed by the Court of Sh.Ravipal Singh Civil Judge, Jr.Div. Gurdaspur on 18.5.2015 and after that the complainant filed a civil appeal in the court of Smt.Anjana Addl. District Judge, Gurdaspur on 16.7.2015 which was dismissed as withdrawn on 28.8.2015. It is the mandatory rule that after the death of real consumer it is the duty of his L.Rs to produce the required document for the change of name of the electric connection and if the complainant wants to transfer the disputed connection in his name in that evet he will produce the no objection certificate/affidavit of the other co sharers and other relevant documents which are required as per the rules and regulations of the opposite parties no.1 to 4. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

4.     Notice of the complaint was also issued to the opposite parties no.5 to 9 who appeared through their counsel and filed their written reply taking the preliminary objections that the complainant has filed the false and frivolous complaint; the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hand; the present complaint is not maintainable in the present Forum and the complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint. On merits, it was submitted that Jassa Singh, Mula Singh, Sucha Singh, Surjit Singh, Satnam Singh sons of Kartar Singh residents of village Karwal, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur moved an application to the opposite parties on 20.4.2010 for the disconnection of the electric connection of Atta Chakki bearing Account No.GP-82/10. In this application the abovesaid applicants stated that the electric connection of Atta Chakki had got by his father but his brother Gurnam Singh running the electric Atta Chakki without any right, title or interest. After that the opposite parties no.1 to 4 issued a memo No.37 dated 26.4.2010 to the complainant and directed the complainant to file the no objection certificate/affidavit of the other co sharers. Again on 12.5.2010 Mula Singh son of Kartar Singh moved an application regarding the disconnection of the abovesaid Atta Chakki bearing Account No.GP-82/10. The applicant also produced the copy of death certificate of Kartar Singh who was the real consumer of the opposite parties no.1 to 4 and photocopy of mutation. Hence the opposite parties no.1 to 4 again issued memo no.126 dated 13.5.2010 to the complainant for producing the no objection certificate of the other co sharer within 5 days, whereas the complainant did not produce any document to the opposite parties no.1 to 4, inspite of memo no.37 dated 26.4.2010. The complainant filed a Civil Suit which was dismissed by the Court of Sh.Ravipal Singh Civil Judge, Jr.Div. Gurdaspur on 18.5.2015 and after that the complainant filed a civil appeal in the court of Smt.Anjana Addl. District Judge, Gurdaspur on 16.7.2015 which was dismissed as withdrawn on 28.8.2015. It is the mandatory rule that after the death of real consumer it is the duty of his LRs to produce the required document for the change of name of the electric connection and if the complainant wants to transfer the disputed connection in his name in that even he will produce the no objection certificate/affidavit of the other co sharers and other relevant documents which are required as per the rules and regulations of the opposite parties no.1 to 4. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs. 

5.      Complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C1, of Baldev Raj Ex.C2 and of Sawinder Singh Ex.C3alongwith other documents Ex.C4 to Ex.C24 and closed the evidence. 

6.       Counsel for the opposite parties no.1 to 4 tendered into evidence affidavit of Er.Arun Kumar Ex.OP11 alongwith other documents Ex.OP-12 to Ex.OP-19 and closed the evidence.

7.       Counsel for the opposite parties no.5 to 9 tendered into evidence affidavit of Jassa Singh, Ex.OP-1, of Moola Singh Ex.OP-2, of Sucha Singh Ex.OP-3, of Surjit Singh Ex.OP-4, of Satnam Singh Ex.OP-6, of Mangal Singh Ex.OP-8, of Madan Mohan Ex.OP-9 alongwith other documents Ex.OP-5, Ex.OP-7 and Ex.OP-10 and closed the evidence.

8.       We have thoroughly examined the available documents/evidence on the records so as to interpret the meaning and purpose of each document and also the scope of adverse inference on account 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 the division-dispute of the ‘Atta-Chakki’ and other property amongst the complainant and his 5 nos. of brothers (OP5 to OP9, here) four years after the demise of their father Kartar Singh. As apparent at the face of the records the de-facto/physical possession of the Atta chakki (as duly admitted by the entire OP) rested with the complainant whereas the ‘de-juro’ possession although claimed by him (on the strength of a ‘family settlement’) was vehemently contested by other siblings. Incidentally, the OP5 & OP7 brothers had retired from the service of the OP corporation and thus they preferred to approach/influence the OP Service Providers vides applications of 20.04.2010 & again on 12.05.2010 to ‘disturb/discontinue’ the continuation of Atta Chakki Power connection that had been continuing for the last ‘four’ years since the demise of the complainant’s father in the year 2006. Having acted upon the instance /instigation of the OP brothers of the complainant the OP corporation issued Memo # 37 & 126 of 26.04.2010 & 13.05.2010, respectively; directing the complainant to produce/submit ‘consent’ affidavit/certificate from the other co-sharers i.e., the present OP brothers (of the complainant). Obviously, arranging of such a consent (from contesters) being ‘infeasible’ and acting upon the available ‘legal advice’ the present complainant filed a civil Suit for decree of permanent injunction restraining the OP Corporation from disconnecting the power connection to the Atta Chakki in dispute; however, the honorable civil court dismissed the suit denying the relief of permanent injunction as the very civil suit filed was found to be not maintainable. As per the orders of Hon’ble Civil Court simple suit for permanent injunction without challenging the notice issued by the OP’s is not maintainable. Further, the complainant as per the available legal advice first preferred an appeal (against the dismissal orders) but later on withdrew the same on 28.08.2015 to get the present complaint admitted for adjudication on the same very day (28.08.2015) and we do not see any technical delinquency/illegality etc as alleged by the OP, here. Interestingly, we find here that the OP1 to OP4 Corporation along with the OP5 to OP9 brothers did not object to the complainant’s continued control/‘running’ of the Atta chakki  for full ‘four’ years after the demise of Kartar Singh Connection Holder father in 2006 but suddenly ‘refuted’ with vehemence at the continuing arrangement in the year 2010. The OP Corporation has even admitted in its written reply and the accompanying affidavits that they had issued the Memos 37 & 126 at the complaint(s) of 20.04.2010 and 12.05.2010 made by the OP4 to OP9 brothers but no cogent evidence has been put forth/produced on the records that the OP Corporation were within its legal rights to disconnect the continuing power connection to the complainant in the absence of proper legal ‘orders’ to that effect. The honorable Civil Court had simply dismissed the Suit for grant of permanent injunction for restraining the Power corporation to disconnect the electricity supply but that never allowed it to arbitrarily and illegally ‘disconnect’ the electricity supply continuing as such for the last four years. Of course, the OP Corporation would have been legally entitled to disconnect the complainant’s ‘supply’ had the OP brothers produced the competent court’s orders and/or its own Rules/Regulations provided for ‘disconnection’ at the instance of private individual(s)/legal heir contester(s) etc but presently that is not the case hence the OP corporation service providers are held guilty of ‘deficiency in service’ & that lines it up for an adverse award under the Act.    

9.      In the light of the all above, we dispose of this complaint and thus ORDER the Opposite party 1 to 4 Corporation not to disconnect the Electric Supply to the Atta Chakki Power Connection being utilized by the Complainant (for earning livelihood) till the receipt of the competent court’s orders/legal partition deed/family settlement etc (by the contesting brothers). The OP5 to OP9 brothers are at liberty if so desire and advised to initiate the family settlement/partition of property etc (in the competent court or out of the court) within 45 days of the present orders otherwise the OP1 to OP4 Corporation shall be free to transfer the Atta Chakki Power Connection in the complainant’s name without the consent of the OP brothers provided he fulfills the requirements of the OP’s except the consent from OP5 to OP9. In the meantime, the complainant shall regularly pay the ‘consumption’ Bills of the Atta Chakki Connection with the OP4 SDO dutifully ensuring that the complainant is not subjected to any future ‘harassment’ under the influence of the OP5 and the OP7 retirees of the OP Corporation

10.       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)

March, 29 2016.                                                  Member.

*MK*