Complainant Surat Singh through the present complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, ‘the Act’) has prayed that the necessary directions be issued to the titled opposite parties to provide the power connection without causing any further delay in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he an Ex-serviceman and had constructed a new shop/dhaba for his own livelihood and has also applied for the power connection for the said shop/dhaba with the opposite parties and has complied with all the requisite formalities. It was pleaded that complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.1,750/- vide receipt No.76 dated 18.12.2014 as security fee. He had also deposited an amount of Rs.25,300/- vide receipt No.316 dated 22.4.2015 as expenses of cable on demand letter No.290 dated 16.4.2015 of the opposite party no.2 and had also purchased cable/wire from his own pocket for Rs.3,200/-. It was further pleaded that No Objection Certificate No.236/M dated 18.3.2015 was also issued by the Executive Engineer central works division Pathankot. Complainant has also issued registered letter dated 28.6.2015 for causing delay in the supply of power connection. It was also pleaded that inspite of completing all the requisite formalities by the complainant opposite parties have failed to install the electric meter. Complainant time and again approached the opposite party no.2 with the same request but of no avail. It was next pleaded that he purchased wire/cable for Rs.25,300/- from his own pocket and without supply of power connection in the shop specially in summer season he was suffering a great loss because of lacking goods, hence this complaint.
3. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared through their counsel and filed the written reply by taking the preliminary objections that complainant has filed false and frivolous complaint with the intention to harass the opposite parties. Complainant has not approached this Hon'ble Court with clean hands and concealed the material facts. Complaint of the complainant is not maintainable in the present form as this Ld. Forum has no jurisdiction to decide the present complaint. Complainant has no locus standi to file the present suit. Complainant has no cause of action to file the present suit. On merit, it was stated that on 22.4.2015 the employees of the opposite parties visited the spot for installation of the connection in dispute but on 23.4.2015 one Lakhwinder Singh and Harbhajan Singh moved an application with the opposite parties and raised the objection that complainant taking the illegal connection in the land of road and also requested that the electric wire not to be erected from their land for the installation of the connection in dispute as they are already running Petrol Pump, Dhaba and shops in the land from where the complainant wants to erect the electric wire/line for his new connection. To prove this fact they have also placed on record copy of FIR and criminal appeals, which were pending and decided between them. It is pertinent to mention here that electric connection cannot be released as it falls within the restricted area as per the rules and regulations of the departments. It was denied that complainant approached the opposite parties several times. All other averments made in the complaint have been denied and lastly the complaint has been prayed to be dismissed.
Complainant has tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C1 along with other documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C6 and closed the evidence.
Sh.Rajesh Kumar S.D.O. of the opposite parties has tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP-1 and copy of application Ex.OP-2.
6. We have duly considered the pleadings of both the parties; heard the arguments advanced by their 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.
7. We have carefully 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. We find that the present dispute arose over the non-release of the electricity connection by the OP Corporation to the complainant for his Food-Dhaba after having duly accepted his application along with the requisite fees and documents etc including sanctions from other departments and with the due completion of other formalities. The complainant has duly produced on record sufficient evidence to prove and prosecute his complaint by way of his affidavit Ex.C1 deposing the allegation as made out in the complaint. He has also produced the deposit Receipts (Ex.C2 & Ex.C3) dated 18.12.2014 & 22.04.2015 for Rs.1750/- & Rs.25300/- respectively; for additional 110 meter electric wire etc along with Ex.C4 Bill dated 01.05.2015 for Rs. 3200/- (PVC 16mm wire) and also the requisite sanction Ex.C5 from the XEN, CPWD, Pathankot; at the instance/asking of the OP Service providers. However, the OP Corporation refused/ deferred the issuance of the applied for connection (as stated in its written reply and affidavit Ex.OP1) at the verbal/written complaint/objection Ex.OP2 filed by some persons of the nearby area. We find from the Ex.OP2 and other material as available on record that the complaining objectors were locked up in many a civil & criminal litigation-combat with the complainant and were also running a Dhaba/Petrol Pump nearby and thus were an interested party. Further, the OP Corporation being a Public Utility Service Provider must maintain and exhibit an impartial show of attitude in play and need not side up with the complaining objectors especially when their self-interest is involved. But, here we find that the OP Corporation through its officials have bruised the consumer rights of the complainant to favor the interested third-party objectors and that determines an ‘unfair trade practice’ amounting to ‘deficiency in service’ and thus holding them liable to an adverse award under the Act.
8. In the light of the all above, we partly allow the present complaint and thus ORDER the titled Opposite parties to release the impugned Electricity Connection to the complainant on urgent basis with the requisite transparency besides to pay him Rs.3000/- as compensation and Rs.2000/- as cost of litigation within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of these orders otherwise the aggregate awarded amount shall attract interest @ 9% PA from the date of the complaint till actually paid.
9. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record.
(Naveen Puri)
President.
ANNOUNCED: (Jagdeep Kaur)
NOV. 23, 2015 Member.
*YP*
