Complaint No: 234 of 2022.
Date of Institution: 17.11.2022.
Date of order:29.11.2023.
Ravinder Kumar Son of Kundan Lal, resident of House No. 157/9, Near Improvement Trust Qadri Mohalla, Gurdaspur, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur.
.....Complainant.
VERSUS
1. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, through its Chairman, the Mall, Patiala.
2. Sub – Divisional Officer, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, City Sub – Division, Gurdaspur.
.....Opposite parties.
Complaint Under section 35 of The Consumer Protection Act.
Present: For the Complainant: Sh. Dinesh Kumar, Advocate.
For the Opposite Parties: Sh. Sandeep Ohri, Advocate.
Quorum: Sh.Lalit Mohan Dogra, President, Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu, Member.
ORDER
Bhagwan Singh Matharu, Member.
Ravinder Kumar, Complainant (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint under section 35 of The Consumer Protection Act, (here-in-after referred to as 'Act') against P.S.P.C.Ltd. (here-in-after referred to as 'opposite parties).
2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant took a shop situated at Fish market, Gurdaspur, on rent from Gurdev Singh and Tarlok Singh, both sons of Harbans Singh, residents of Village Dharo Chak, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur vide rent note dated 10.05.1989. It was submitted that the shop is situated in Fish Market, Gurdaspur and as per Rent Note, the complainant is free to install the electric connection in his name and he is bound to make the payment of the electricity charges. It was further submitted that the complainant earlier installed an electric connection bearing Account No. 30001893546 in his name after taking the shop on rent and he was paying the electricity charges regularly to the opposite parties without any default. It was further submitted that the complainant is using the shop as godown and he used to keep the seasonal goods in the shop. The complainant used to sell the seasonal goods likewise thread, kites, clothes and peanuts etc. which used at the time of Lohri festival. In the same way, he used to keep the colours for Holi festival as well as summer and winter clothes. The complainant also used to sell the seasonal goods of different festivals in the shop in dispute. It was further submitted that in the year 2018, due to some financial crises, the complainant himself moved an application for disconnecting the electric connection. According, the opposite parties have disconnected the electricity connection installed in the shop in dispute after clearing/paying the all dues of electricity charges. It was further submitted that the complainant used to open the shop regularly to earn his livelihood, but there is no electric connection and necessity has arisen to install the electricity meter to run his business. It was further submitted that thereafter, the complainant moved an application to the opposite parties to install new electric meter in the shop in dispute on his name. The complainant has also deposited the charges of installing electricity meter in the shop i.e. Rs.2,160/- on 06.12.2021. It was alleged that the opposite parties did not take any action on the application of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant approached to the opposite party No.2 to install the electric connection in the shop in question, as the complainant is in dire need of it but the opposite parties have refused to install new electricity meter in the shop in question. Due to this illegal act and conduct of the opposite parties the complainant has suffered great loss and also suffered mental agony, Physical harassment and inconvenience. So, there is a clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
On the backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency and negligence in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties and prayed that necessary directions may kindly be issued to the opposite parties to install the new electric connection in the shop in question on the name of complainant, in the interest of justice.
3. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint and filed their written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint, that the complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint, that the complaint of the complainant is not legally maintainable and that there is no deficiency in services on the part of the opposite parties. It was pleaded that previously NRS electric connection was running in the name of Ravinder Kumar and he gave an application for disconnection of the said electric connection and the same was permanently disconnected as per the request of the complainant. It was further pleaded that the complainant moved an application for new electric connection and submitted the file. The connection form filled by the complainant clearly provides that the consent of the owner requires. Further one Gurdev Singh and Tarlok Singh both sons of Harbans Singh gave application to the department that they are owner of the property and case with regard to the property is pending at Civil Courts, Gurdaspur and requested not to release the electric connection. It was further pleaded that the letter having No. 31.01.2022 and 10.05.2022 has been sent to Ravinder Kumar i.e. Complainant in this regard, but he fails to give satisfactory reply. So due to pendency of the civil case and dispute the electric connection has not been released.
On merits, the opposite parties have reiterated their stand as taken in legal objections and denied all the averments of the complaint and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. In the end, the opposite parties prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of Ravinder Kumar, (Complainant) as Ex.CW-1/A alongwith other documents as Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-2.
5. Learned counsel for the opposite parties has tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Arun Bhardwaj, (S.D.O, P.S.P.C.Ltd, Sub – Division City Gurdaspur) as Ex.OPW-1/A alongwith other documents as Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-6.
6. Rejoinder not filed by the complainant.
7. Written arguments not filed by both the parties.
8. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of counsels for the parties; oral arguments advanced by their respective counsels and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsels for the purpose of adjudication of the present complaint.
9. As detailed above the present complaint was filed by the complainant to get electricity connection in the rented shop to run business for livelihood against the application submitted by him vide deposit receipt at Ex.C3 to the opposite party No.2.
10. It is the admitted fact of the case that as per Ex.C1 the owner of the shop namely Sh.Tarlok Singh signed a rent note with the complainant on 10.05.1989 about 34years back. As per paras No.4 and 6 of the complaint the complainant got a electric connection released in this shop there and then and afterwards he himself got this connection disconnected 5 years back in the year 2018 by making a request to the opposite party No.2.
11. Now after 5 years the complainant again applied for electric connection with the opposite party No.2 in the same shop but opposite party No.2 has denied to issue the NRS connection in this shop with the reason that the owner of the shop has moved an application as Ex.OP-4 for not to release the said connection because as per Ex.OP-5 there is a court case pending in the Hon'ble Civil Courts Gurdaspur in this regard. As per Ex.OP-1 a notice was also issued to the complainant in this regard to rebut the objections of the owner of the shop but complainant has not submitted any evidence as proof of reply.
12. On perusal of the evidences in this case it is seen that a rent note dated 10.05.1989 as per Ex.C1 was valid for 11 months only and it has not been renewed further by both the parties. Further, there is court case pending in the Hon'ble Civil Court, Gurdaspur as per Ex.OP-5 with regard to this property. Furthermore the old electric connection in this shop was disconnected on the request of the complainant in the year 2018.
13. At present there is no valid rent note available at this time for this shop with the complainant and demanding electric connection on the ground that it was earlier existing in this shop almost 5 years back is not a valid ground to get the connection without the consent of the owner and during the pendency of the civil suit related to this property.
14. Ld. counsel for the opposite parties has also apprised to this Commission during the course of arguments that there are certain formalities required to be completed as per Supply Code-2014 regulation 6.4.3 and ESIM- 2018 instruction No.3.3 under condition for registration of application by the department before release of the electric connection which are to be completed by the owner of the shop but the owner of the shop has not given any consent rather objected for not to release the electric connection.
15. In view of the above we find no merit in the present complainant. Hence, the present complaint is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
16. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. File be consigned.
(Lalit Mohan Dogra)
President
Announced: (B.S.Matharu)
Nov. 29, 2023 Member
YP.
