DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA (PUNJAB)
CC No. 168 of 21-04-2011 Decided on : 11-07-2011
Rakesh Kumar S/o Ghasham Dass R/o Village Sekhu, Tehsil Talwandi Sabo, District Bathinda. .... Complainant Versus
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall, Patiala, through its Secretary. Addl. Chief Engineer Sub Area, Bathinda. S.D.O. P.S.P.C.L. Sub Division, Raman Mandi, District Bathinda. Assistant XEN, Sub Division, Maur. ..... Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM Ms. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member
For the Complainant : Sh. V.P. Khurmi, counsel for the complainant For the Opposite parties : Sh. J D Nayyar, counsel for opposite parties.
O R D E R
VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT
The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (here-in-after referred to as 'Act'). Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that electric connection bearing A/c No. B52SK260283K in the name of Ghansham Dass, father of the complainant has been installed in the aforesaid premises. After the death of his father, he has been using the said connection and paying the electricity bills so issued by the opposite parties. On 17-02-2010, the opposite parties disconnected his electric connection without any reason and removed the electricity wire provided from the electric pole to the house of the complainant. The opposite parties have been issuing the electricity bills regularly since the date of disconnection of the electric connection to the complainant which he is paying without fail and as such, the said bills are illegal. The complainant approached the opposite parties many times and requested them to re-install the said connection and to refund the amount so paid by him to them after the disconnection of his connection, but to no effect. Hence, this complaint has been filed by the complainant seeking directions of this Forum to the opposite parties to reinstall his electric connection and to refund the amount so received by them by issuing bills after disconnection of electric connection and pay him compensation and cost. The opposite parties filed their joint written reply and pleaded that electric connection of the complainant is running as per the records of the opposite parties and the same has not been disconnected. The connection holder is regularly paying the electricity bills so issued by the opposite parties. As per policy, the opposite parties are in the process of shifting the electricity meters of all the connection holders outside the premises on the poles and the complainant right from the beginning has been opposing to the same and has not been allowing the opposite parties to shift the electricity meter on the pole despite repeated requests. The complainant has filed the present complaint on false grounds only for the reason that the electricity meter is not shifted out. Parties have led evidence in support of their pleadings. Arguments heard and written submissions submitted by the parties perused. The complainant in para Nos. 3 & 4 of his complaint has alleged that his electric connection was disconnected on 17-02-2010 and he has been paying the bills so issued by the opposite parties even after disconnection of connection and now he has filed the present complaint seeking refund of that amount and re-installation of his electric connection. The version of the opposite parties is that as per policy of the opposite parties, the electric meter of the complainant was to be shifted outside his premises on the pole but he was not allowing the officials to do the same and rather filed this complaint. Since the opposite parties have taken the plea that the complainant is not allowing them to shift his electric meter outside his premises but complainant stated that he has no objection for the same, so to adjudicate the matter in controversy, during the proceedings of the case, this Forum directed the opposite parties to shift electric meter of the complainant outside his premises. Accordingly, as per M.C.O. Ex. R-4, the officials of the opposite parties visited the house of the complainant on 25-04-2011 to shift the meter but he did not allow the same and a report to this effect has been made on the M.C.O. itself. Thereafter the officials of the opposite parties again visited the premises of the complainant on 23-05-2010 and his meter has been shifted outside of his premises as per order of this Forum but at that time too, he refused to sign the M.C.O. and a note to this effect has been endorsed by the concerned official on the M.C.O and the officials of the opposite parties got signatures of the neighbours of the complainant on the backside of the said M.C.O. Hence, due to this attitude of the complainant, the version of the opposite parties seems to be correct that the complainant was not allowing them to shift his electric meter outside of his premises. Moreover, if for arguments sake it be admitted that electric connection of the complainant was disconnected on 17-02-2010 and he has been paying the electricity bills, why he has not knocked the door of this Forum earlier whereas he has filed the complaint before this Forum on 21-04-2011 i.e. more than a year after disconnection as alleged by him. Moreover, the complainant has nowhere contended that he has not used electricity during this period. In the today's life when electricity is the most essential commodity and without it even a single day is impossible, in such circumstances, it cannot be presumed that he had been sitting without electricity. Hence, this Forum is of the view that the complainant has failed to prove his case by placing cogent and convincing evidence on the file. In view of what has been discussed above, this complaint fails and is hereby dismissed. The parties are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned to record room.
Pronounced 11-07-2011 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni) President
(Amarjeet Paul) Member
|
