Complainant Parvej Masih through the present complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short 'the Act') has sought the acceptance of the present complaint alongwith necessary directions to the titled opposite parties not to disconnect his electric connection and also to pay him Rs.20,000/- as damages and compensation for causing harassment etc. in the interest of justice.    

2.       The case of the complainant in brief is that he owned the electric connection # G33KR522041P and has been paying the consumption Bills regularly. However, of late, the OP Corporation has been pressurizing him to deposit Rs.6,800/- being the Bill of some other consumer Kashmir Singh. Upon his refusal, he was threatened with disconnection and he was forced to pay Rs.5,000/- to the OP JE who did not issue any valid receipt for the same. The OP service providers also refused to entertain his complaint and hence he has preferred the present complaint with the desired relief as prayed, hereinabove.

3.       Upon notice, the Opposite Parties appeared through their counsel and filed the joint written version confirming the Electric connection in the name of the complainant but have vehemently refuted the charges of any unauthorized demand of Rs.6,800/- being the usage Bill of some other consumer and/or of the threat of disconnection etc. Further, the J.E. of the department had never accepted any Rs. 5,000/- from the complainant without issuance of the valid receipt and of course he being a chronic defaulter the demands of drawn Bills were duly made as per the procedure duly established by law. Lastly, it has been stated that the electric energy as utilized by the complainant becomes liable for payment by him and as such the present complaint deserved dismissal with costs.

4.       Both the parties have produced/filed their respective affidavits and other related documents in evidence to support their pleadings/objections on record and the learned counsels for the litigants have duly put forth their respective arguments. We have carefully considered and perused all the available material while adjudicating the present complaint.

5.       We observe that the complainant has imputed the allegation that the OP had been pressurizing him to deposit the Bill amount of Rs 6.800/- pertaining to some other consumer Kashmir Singh but he has failed to prove the same during the course of the entire proceedings through some cogent and acceptable evidence. On the other hand, the OP have deposed through the affidavit of its SDO that no such demand was ever made to the complainant nor he was threatened in the name of disconnection etc. Sighted through the above backdrop, the sought after relief becomes in-fructuous and as such loses its vitality befitting of a favorable award under the Act.  

6.       In the light of the all above, we find no merit in the present complaint and thus ORDER for its dismissal with however no orders as to its costs.

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

                                   (Naveen Puri)                                                                                President

ANNOUNCED:                        (G.B.S.Bhullar)               (Jagdeep Kaur)

February 19, 2015.                            Member.                          Member.

*MK*