Brief facts of the complaint are that complainant is consumer of the opposite parties having residential electric connection No. 23 BD 361631-A installed in Kothi No.60, Model Town, Kapurthala and has been regularly paying the electricity bills. . It is further alleged that in the third week of June, 2009, complainant was shocked to receive memo No. 1145 dated 12/6/2009 from the opposite parties raisin demand of Rs.9322/- from the complainant . On inquiry from the opposite parties, she came to know that on checking on 4/6/2009, complainant was found committing unauthorized use of electricity and on this account complainant was directed to deposit the said amount, in fact no checking was ever conducted as alleged. No show cause notice was ever served upon the complainant asking her to remain present in her house at the time of alleged checking. and thus opposite parties have violated their own instructions which amounts to clear cut deficiency in service on their part against which complainant is entitled to the reliefs claimed. 2. Notice of the complaint was sent to the opposite parties who appeared through counsel and filed written statement. 3. In support of her version complainant has produced in evidence affidavit and documents Ex.C1 to C3. 4. On the other hand opposite parties produced in evidence affidavit and documents Ex.R1 to R7. 5. We have heard arguments of learned counsel for the parties and perused ocular as well as documentary evidence on the record. Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that impunged memo No. 1145 dated 12/6/2009 of the opposite party No.3 requiring complainant to pay Rs.9322/- within seven days under Section 36 of the Electricity Act, 2003 on account of alleged checking of premises of the complainant by the opposite parties on 4/6/2009 alleging committing unauthorized use of electricity is wrong, false, without any basis against rules and instructions and against principle of natural justice and same is liable to be declared illegal, unwarranted, unlawful and arbitrary since there is no occasion for the complainant to commit any alleged unauthorized use of electricity. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties has counter argued that premises of the complainant were checked by the officials of the opposite parties vide checking report Ex.R3 and found using unauthorized use of electricity with the help of 2 BHP electric motor for randa machine and two electric motors of 500 watt each for stone cutting and grinding purpose and thereafter the complainant was rightly charged amount of Rs.9322/- on account of unauthorized use of electricity by the officials of the opposite parties after compliance with due procedure as prescribed in Sales Regulations, and the Electricity Act, 2003. We have considered rival contentions of counsel for the parties. We do not find merit in the contentions of learned counsel for the complainant. No doubt, complainant has denied committing of unauthorized use of electricity o the alleged date 4/6/2009 but we find preponderance of evidence produced by the opposite parties to substantiate the charge of unauthorized use of electricity. There is affidavit of Rupinder Pal Singh AEE Ex.R1 supported by another affidavit of Darshan singh AEE of PSEB Sub Division Tibba Ex.R2 an affidavit of Rajiv Kumar JE PSEB Sub Division Suburban Kapurthala Ex.R7 that on 4/6/2009 they inspected the premises of the complainant in her presence and found using electricity unauthorizedly, construction work of the house of the complainant was going on and was using 2 BHP electric motor for randa machine for wooden work and two electric motors of 500 wtt each for stone cutting and grinding purpose. They have proved checking report Ex.R3 dated 4/6/2009 depicting vivid description of mode of unauthorized use of electricity and refusal of the complainant to sign the same. Ex.R4 memo dated 12/6/2009 for imposing penalty charges of Rs.9322/-.followed by final assessment order No.1301 dated 7/7/2009 Ex.R5. It has been clearly alleged in para -3 of the written statement supported by affidavit Ex.R1 that copy of checking report was given at the spot to the complainant though she refused to sign the checking report. The assessment order dated 12/6/2009 for imposition of charges as per LDH formula for assessment of electricity consumption under clause IV of the Regulation No.36 was also served upon the complainant. The electric connection bearing A/c No. in the name of the complainant sanctioned merely for 0.64 KW load for residential kothi and it is not possible to carry out further constuction work with this small load of 0.64 kw. we do not find any evidence of the opposite parties which may smack of ill will grudge or enmity against the complainant to make out fabricated case for unauthorized use of electricity. In the ultimate analysis of aforesaid discussion, finding no merit in this complaint, same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Let certified copies of order be supplied to the parties without delay and file be consigned to record room.
Announced : Shashi Narang Gulshan Prashar Paramjit Singh 16.10.2009 Member Member President. | 
