Complainant Harjit 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 not to shift the tubewell connection in dispute alongwith its Transformer from the place of its existence to any other place illegally, forcibly and without written consent of the complainant and his other brothers. Opposite parties be further directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony, physical torture and financial loss caused by the opposite parties to him due to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice alongwith Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that an electric Tubewell connection bearing Account No.G21AP 56/0408 had been installed in the name of his grandfather namely Sh.Tara Singh. After demise of Sh.Tara Singh, his estate was inherited by his legal heir i.e. his father and he used to irrigate their land with the abovesaid tubewell connection. His father had also expired and his estate had been devolved upon him and his other brothers and they are using the Tubewell connection for irrigation of their land. Moreover, there is no dispute between the Co-sharers. It was next pleaded that the connection in dispute is running for the last about six decades. At present the land in which tubewell connection in dispute is running is in actual, physical, cultivating possession as he had purchased the same from Sukhraj Singh son of Shivcharan Singh vide Registered sale deed dated 22.3.2010. The opposite parties without any reason or rhyme are issuing threats to shift the tubewell connection in dispute alongwith Transformer from the place of its existence to some other place illegally, forcibly and without his consent and his other brothers. This act of the opposite party is illegal, uncalled for and requires immediate check by this Ld. Commission. In case, the opposite parties succeeds in their illegal mission and object, in that event he and his other brothers will suffer irreparable loss and injury, as they will not be in a position to irrigate their respective fields with the tubewell connection in dispute. He approached the opposite party and requested them to admit his claim, not to shift the tubewell connection and its transformer from the present place of existence to other place, illegally, forcibly and without his consent. But opposite party no.3 flatly refused to listen him, which illegal act of the opposite party caused mental agony, physical torture and financial loss to him. 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 who appeared through their counsel and filed their written reply taking the preliminary objections that the present complaint has been filed by the complainant in order to restrain the opposite party PSPCL Department from shifting the T/W connection bearing No.G 21 AP 56/0408 and the Transformer installed nearby. As there is no application for shifting of the abovesaid T/W connection and the same would not be shifted to any other land of the consumer. So far as the Transformer is concerned that has already been shifted to some other location and the complaint has been rendered in fructuous and is liable to be dismissed. On merits, it was submitted that the story of shifting of T/W connection mentioned in the complaint is false. The T/W connection is shifted to another place on the application of the consumer and an estimate is prepared and passed by the Senior Officials of the PSPCL Department. After passing the cost of the estimate, it was deposited by the applicant then the T/W connection was shifted as per the rules and regulations of the PSPCL. But in this case no application has been moved by any person to shift the T/W connection. As such the question of shifting of T/W connection does not arise. So far as the shifting of Transformer is concerned, it is particularly mentioned that a Tansformer of 100 KVA has been installed in order to give proper electric supply to 11 Tubewell connections installed around it. This Transformer 100 KVA named as SHIVCHARAN SINGHWALA was installed on the roadside since long. Five FIRs were registered U/s 136 of Electricity Act, 2003 at Anti Power Theft Police Station Verka regarding the theft of Transformer Oil and other concerned accessories of the Transformer. It caused a huge loss to the PSPCL and the crops of the people were also badly damaged at the time of replacement of another Transformer. Aggrieved farmers made applications to shift the Transformer from the present position. It was next submitted that for shifting this Transformer an estimate was prepared and was passed by the Senior XEN and after completing all other requisite formalities for shifting this Transformer, it has been shifted 200 meters away from its previous position since June, 2019. Now the Transformer is working properly at new place and after shifting no complaint of any kind has come forth. This transformer is providing proper electricity to the 11 tubewell connections of its electric line including the T/W connection of the complainant. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. It is particularly mentioned that the Transformer is the property of the opposite party PSPCL Department and the complainant is not the owner of the Transformer and the same is installed in order to give proper supply of electricity to the concerned electric connections. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.
4. Rejoinder to written statement filed by complainant.
5. Alongwith complaint, complainant has filed his own affidavit Ex.CAW-1 and Ex.CAW-2 and other documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-5.
6. Alongwith written reply, opposite parties filed affidavit of Er.Yousaf Masih SDO, PSPCL Aliwal Ex.OP-1 and other documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP-9.
7. Written arguments have been filed on behalf of opposite parties.
8. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of counsel for both the parties and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsel for the parties for the purposes of adjudication of the present complaint.
9. As detailed above, present complaint is filed by complainant regarding not to shift tubewell connection and transformer. It is alleged by the complainant that Tubewell connection in dispute is installed in the name of his grandfather for about six decades and one transformer of 100 KVA is also installed at the same place. It is apprehended by the complainant that opposite party is going to shift the said tubewell connection alongwith transformer to another place. The application moved by complainant in this regard is also placed at Ex.C-2 and C-3.
10. Opposite party in their written reply denied all the allegation and stated that neither the tubewell connection in dispute has been shifted nor there is any move for this as there is no such application pending from any consumer regarding shifting of the said tubewell connection.
11. Further it is pleaded by opposite party that as far as shifting of transformer is concerned, this transformer which is of 100 KVA capacity is the property of PSPCL and supplying electricity to ten other consumers also. It is not meant only for one tubewell connection of the complainant. Opposite party also quoted the reference of an application submitted by other ten consumers which is placed at Ex.OP-4, to shift this transformer at nearby safe place with the reason that this transformer is installed on roadside and there happens to be theft of transformer oil and other parts of transformers time and again thereby disrupting the electricity supply to all the tubewell connection every time for days together. Other reports regarding damage to transformer are also placed on record.
12. It is also mentioned by opposite party that in view of above application of other consumers and to avoid disruption of electric supply time and again it was decided by Department to shift 100 KVA transformer to a safer place at 200 meters away from present place. Further it is added by opposite party that the transformer in question has already been shifted in 2019 on technical ground with the approval of competent authority just to avoid theft of material etc. and for reliability and continuity of electric supply to all the consumers including the complainant.
13. From the above, it is brought out that it is the admitted fact by opposite party that transformer in question has already been shifted to 200 meters away in view of more reliable electric supply and to avoid theft of material from transformer which were happening time and again earlier. The transformer is shifted as per rules and regulations of PSPCL in the public interest for better quality of electric supply. Moreover electric supply is not effected to present complainant also. It is also brought out by opposite party that there is no such theft of material reported after shifting of transformer and electric supply is being given to all the consumers in better way.
14. As far as shifting of tubewell connection is concerned it is already made clear by opposite party that tubewell connection has not been shifted and there is no such application pending with them for the same.
15. In view of the abovesaid discussion, facts and circumstances of the case, the complaint is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.
16. The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.
17. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. File be consigned.
(Naveen Puri)
President
Announced: (Bhagwan Singh Matharu)
June 02, 2022 Member
*MK*
