Brief facts of the complaint are that complainant who is resident of Model Town Kapurthala submitted A & A form alongwith the security or Rs.5390/- deposited with the opposite party vide receipt No.314 dated 5/8/2007 and completed all the usual formalities and the complainant got installed electric meter in his newly built house on 27/8/08 by the opposite parties. It is further averred that officials of the opposite parties visited the residence of the complainant and asked for Shagun amount of Rs. 2000/- on the pretext that everyone pays the same on getting new connection but complainant refused to accede illegal demand of the officials of the opposite parties who threatened complainant to face consequences. It is further alleged that on 21/11/2008, officials of the opposite parties visited the residence of complainant and removed abovesaid meter illegally and forcibly without any reason and without any notice. Complainant, however, went to the office of opposite party No.2 for seeking relief. But opposite party No.2 told the complainant to pay the penalty of more than Rs. 1,00,000/- for not acceding demand of the officials of the opposite parties and advised complainant to visit SE to redress his grievance on which complainant approached SE who after hearing his grievance asked to meet dealing hand Mr.Bhatia who got the signatures of the complainant on 3/4 blank papers and opposite parties have used those papers to their own choice and called upon complainant to deposit Rs.50,000/- with the opposite party No.2. As no notice was served upon the complainant to levy arbitrary, illegal and unjustified demand of Rs.50000/- which is against rules and regulations of the department and charges on account of alleged theft of electricity are illegal and unjustified and there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.<br /> 2. Notice of the complaint was sent to the opposite parties who appeared through counsel and filed written statement in which allegations made in the complaint have been emphatically denied.<br /> 3. In support of his version complainant has produced in evidence affidavit and documents Ex.C1 to C14.<br /> 4. On the other hand opposite parties produced in evidence affidavits and documents Ex.R1 to R23.<br /> 5. We have heard arguments of learned counsel for the parties and perused ocular as well as documentary evidence on the record. Counsel for the complainant has argued that complainant who is resident of Model Town Kapurthala submitted A & A form alongwith the security or Rs.5390/- deposited with the opposite party vide receipt No.314 dated 5/8/2007 and completed all the usual formalities and the complainant got installed electric meter in his newly built house on 27/8/08 by the opposite parties. It is further argued that officials of the opposite parties visited the residence of the complainant and asked for Shagun amount of Rs. 2000/- on the pretext that everyone pays the same on getting new connection but complainant refused to accede illegal demand of the officials of the opposite parties who threatened complainant to face consequences. It is further argued that on 21/11/2008, officials of the opposite parties visited the residence of complainant and removed abovesaid meter illegally and forcibly without any reason and without any notice. Complainant, however, went to the office of opposite party No.2 for seeking relief but opposite party No.2 told the complainant to pay the penalty of more than Rs. 1,00,000/- for not acceding demand of the officials of the opposite parties and advised complainant to visit SE to redress his grievance on which complainant approached SE who after hearing his grievance asked to meet dealing hand Mr.Bhatia who got the signatures of the complainant on 3/4 blank papers and opposite parties have used those papers to their own choice and called upon complainant to deposit Rs.50,000/- with the opposite party No.2. As no notice was served upon the complainant to levy arbitrary, illegal and unjustified demand of Rs.50000/- which is against rules and regulations of the department and charges on account of alleged theft of electricity are illegal and unjustified and there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.<br /> On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties has argued that premises of the complainant was checked by Er. Darshan Singh AEE and Er.Rupinder Pal Singh AEE of the opposite parties on 22/7/08 found that complainant was committing theft of electricity by using electricity directly from LT line by way of uniting black single core wire with the help of wooden sticks using various kinds of loads mentioned in the checking report No. 1/1017 dated 22/7/08 and as per instructions of department, complainant was asked to deposit Rs.1,03,210/- vide assessment order No.4547 dated 25/7/08 on account of compensation of theft of electricity committed by the complainant and Senior Executive Engineer and Superintending Engineer of the opposite parties after listening grievances of the complainant reduced the penalty amount to the tune of Rs.51605/- and granting additional relief on the request of the complainant to deposit Rs.51605/- for alleged theft committed by the complainant in four equal installments. Neither Mr.Bhatia dealing officer nor Sanjeev Sharma LDC Suburban Sub Division obtained the signatures of complainant on blank papers. Therefore, there is no unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.<br /> 6. We have considered rival contentions of counsel for the parties. There is no merit in the contentions of counsel for the complainant. Admittedly complainant submitted A & A form and also deposited Rs.5390/- with the opposite parties on 5/8/07 for releasing of electric connection for his residential house and as per the complainant, the meter was installed on 27/8/08 whereas phtocopies of the electricity bills bearing A/C No.TC/438 in the name of complainant issued by the opposite parties vide Ex.C8 to C10 show that temporary electric connection was running during the year 2005 but as per the record, the regular connection of the complainant was never installed by the opposite parties on 27/8/08. In order to prove their case, opposite parties have produced in evidence checking report Ex.R1 No. 1/1017 dated 22/7/08 by Er.Darshan Singh AEE supported by his own affidavit Ex.R5 and affidavit of Er.Rupinder Pal Singh AEE Ex.R4. The checking party found that complainant was getting wooden work done and found stealing electric energy directly from LT Line by way of uniting black single core wire with the help of wooden sticks while using other appliances and different kinds of loads and as per the affidavit of Er.Rupinder Pal Singh AEE checking party recorded their observations on the checking report in the presence of Gurmail Singh Carpenter present at the spot at the time of checking who signed the checking report and received copy of the same. Ex.R2 is the assessment order of the opposite parties addressed to the complainant vide which demand of Rs.1,03,210/- was raised to the complainant vide memo NO.4547 dated 25/7/08 under Section 135 of E.A. 2003 Regulation No.37 of E.C. 2007. on account of theft of energy committed by the complainant. Ex.R3 is the memo No.4546 dated 25/7/08 of opposite party No.2 addressed to SHO, PS, Kapurthala to register the case against the complainant regarding alleged theft of energy committed by the complainant. We fail to understand that if the complainant was not committing theft of energy then why he moved an application Ex.R10 to Senior Executive Engineer on 27/1/2009 under his signatures for a permission to allow him to deposit the fine in four equal installments and why he moved application Ex.R12 under his signatures to Deputy Chief Manager Distribution Circle Kapurthala to review the whole matter of theft. Ex.R6 to R23 are the documents produced by the opposite parties indicates some relief granted to the complainant after listening his grievance and reduced penalty imposed to the complainant in the first instance amount of Rs.1,03,210/- to Rs.51605/- to deposit the same in four installments.. We do not find any illwill or enmity with complainant to fabricate false case of theft of electricity against him.<br /> So in view of the above, complaint has no merit and same deserves dismissal. So the complaint is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.<br /> Let certified copies of order be supplied to the parties and file be consigned to record room.<br /> <br /> Announced Shashi Narang Paramjit Singh<br /> 11.6.2009 Member President.<br />