DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MANSA. Complaint No.94/10.07.2008 Decided on : 31.12.2008 Sh.Hari Dev S/o Sh.Kaur Chand resident of Village Street, Ward No.17, Tehsil and District Mansa. ..... Complainant. VERSUS Sub Divisional Officer, Punjab State Electricity Board, City, Tehsil and District Mansa. ..... Opposite Party. Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. ..... Present: Sh.S.K. Singla, Advocate counsel for the complainant. Sh.S.K.Bansal, Advocate counsel for the Opposite Party. Before: Sh.Pritam Singh Dhanoa, President. Sh.Sarat Chander, Member. Smt.Neena Rani Gupta, Member. ORDER:- Sh.Pritam Singh Dhanoa, President. Sh.Hari Dev son of Sh.Kaur Chand, resident of Village Street, Ward No.17, Mansa, has filed this complaint, against the Punjab State Electricity Board (hereinafter called as the Board), under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short called the 'Act'). As per averments made, in the complaint, the complainant has secured a domestic electric connection, bearing Account No.VR32/32, and he has been regularly, making payment of charges of electricity, consumed by him, as such, he is a consumer, within the purview, of the definition, given in the Act. The opposite party, has served a notice, upon the complainant, vide Contd........2 : 2 : letter No.1592 dated 25.6.2008, raising a demand of Rs.15,668/-, which is illegal and against the rules and regulations of the board, on the subject and complainant is under no obligation, for making the payment of the said amount. The house of the complainant, had been lying locked and checking of the electric meter, installed therein, has never been done, by the opposite party. The complainant, has suffered physical and mental torture, due to service of notice, upon him, by the opposite party, as such, the notice served upon him, raising demand of Rs.15,668/-, is liable, to be set aside, and complainant is entitled, to receive the amount of Rs.10,000/-, on account of compensation, and another sum of Rs.5,000/-, on account costs, as opposite party, has failed, to provide relief, to him, inspite of being approached, to do so, hence this complaint. 2. On being put to notice, opposite party filed written version, resisting the complaint, by taking preliminary objections; that the complainant, has no locus standi, and cause of action, to file the complaint, which has been filed by him, with malafide intention, to harass the opposite party, as such, the same, is liable to be dismissed, with compensatory costs of, Rs.5,000/-. On merits, it is not denied that, complainant is a consumer, under the board, and domestic connection bearing Account No.VR32/32, has been installed, in his house. It is also admitted that, notice has been served, upon the complainant, vide letter bearing No.1592, dated 25.6.2008, asking him, to deposit a sum of Rs.15,668/-, because, he was caught using electric energy, for a shop, forming part of his house and notice has been served upon him, and he is liable to pay the amount for electricity consumed in his shop, without securing proper sanction, and his complaint is liable to be dismissed, with costs. 3. On being called upon by this Forum, to do so, the complainant tendered his affidavit, Exhibit C-1 and photocopies of documents Ext.C-2 to C-4. On the other hand, Sh. Parveen Kumar, Junior Engineer of the Contd........3 : 3 : board, has furnished his affidavit Ext.OP-3 on behalf of Opposite Party. He has also tendered, copies of letter dated 25.6.2008, Ext.OP-1, relevant page of Consumer Checking Register Ext.OP-2 and copy of calculation sheet of amount of demand, Ext.OP-4 and his counsel closed the evidence on his behalf. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the oral and documentary evidence, adduced on record, by the parties, carefully, with their kind assistance. 5. At the out set, learned counsel, for the complainant Sh.S.K.Singla, Advocate, has submitted that, as per remarks given in the checking report, house of the complainant, at the time of alleged checking, was lying locked, and his electric meter, installed therein, has been reported, to be properly functioning . Learned counsel, has argued that, there is no evidence, on the basis of which, plea of the opposite party, may be accepted, that a room, forming part of his house, is being used by the complainant, as a shop, as such, impugned notice, served upon him, is liable, to be set aside, and he is entitled, to receive compensation, for physical and mental agony, suffered by him, along with costs of litigation incurred for filing of instant complaint. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel, for the opposite party, Sh.S.K.Bansal, Advocate, has submitted, that checking report bears the signatures of the representative of the complainant, and notice has been served, upon him, on the basis, of the checking report, prepared by the responsible officer, as such, complainant is liable, to pay the amount of demand to the opposite party, for the loss caused, to the board, to the extent mentioned in the notice, served upon him, as per the rules and bye laws of the board, on the subject. Learned counsel has argued that, complainant, was required, to secure 'NRS' connection, for the shop, forming part of his house, as such, use of electric energy for running shop forming part of his house, is illegal and demand raised upon him by Contd........4 : 4 : the opposite party is justified. 7. It is admitted fact that electric connection bearing No.VR32/32, is installed, in the domestic house of the complainant. As such, the complainant, is 'consumer', under the opposite party, within the purview of the definition, given in the Act. The plea of the opposite party is that a room, forming part of his house, is being used by him, as a shop i.e. for commercial purpose. The perusal of checking reports, Ext.C-3 and OP-2, brought on record, by the parties, reveals that, as per note contained, in the remarks column, house of the complainant, was lying locked, because of which, load of electric energy, could not be verified, by the checking staff. However, in the Column No.7, of these documents, it is found mentioned that, meter installed, in the house of the complainant, was 'OK' and was functional. These documents, have been signed, on behalf of the consumer, by his representative, but there is no documentary proof, to show that, complainant, is running any room, forming part of his house, as a karyana shop. Even in notice Ext.OP-1, the source, from which the checking staff came, to know that, complainant, is using a room, forming part of his house, as a karyana shop, is not disclosed by the opposite party. In the absence of any proof that complainant, is running a karyana shop of his house, we are unable to accept the plea of the counsel, for the opposite party that, board is entitled, to claim tariff, qua the shop of the complainant on commercial basis, treating the same to be 'NRS' connection. In the copy of the notice Ext.OP-1 and calculation sheet Ext.OP-4, the amount has been charged, from the date of inspection i.e. 23.06.2008. 8. We are of the opinion that, as the opposite party, has failed, to prove on record, any positive proof of running of any shop, in his house, by the complainant, therefore, their action of raising demand of Rs.15,668/-, is unjustified, and is not sustainable. 9. For the aforesaid reasons, we have come to the conclusion, that impugned notice, served upon the complainant, vide letter No.1592 Contd........5 : 5 : dated 25.6.2008, is liable to set aside. As there is 'deficiency in services' on the part of the opposite party, therefore, the complainant also deserves, to be compensated, for physical and mental agony, suffered and expenses incurred, by him, due to the conduct, of the opposite party, in raising a demand of Rs.15,668/-, although there is no allegation, that he has tempered, with his electric meter, and has extracted electric energy, through any other illegal means. 10. Resultantly, the complaint is allowed and we set aside the impugned notice, served upon the complainant, vide letter No.1592 dated 25.6.2008, and burden the opposite party, in the sum of Rs.2,000/-, on account of compensation, and costs in the sum of Rs.1,000/-. However, the opposite party, shall be at liberty, to raise fresh demand, after service of notice, upon the complainant, and after affording him opportunity of being heard, if he is caught using shop, forming part of his residential house, for sale of karyana goods, if he so desires or advises. 11. The copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of charges, as permissible, under the rules. File be indexed and consigned to record. Pronounced: 31.12.2008 Neena Rani Gupta, Sarat Chander, P.S.Dhanoa, Member. Member. President.
