| ORDER | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA (PUNJAB)
CC No. 123 of 19-03-2012 Decided on : 12-04-2012
Ravi Kumar aged about 40 years, S/o Uttam Chand R/o Shop Near ICICI Bank, Bibi Wala Road, Bathinda. ... Complainant Versus Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, The Mall, Patiala, through its Secretary/Chairman. S.D.O/AEE, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Cantt. Sub Division, Bathinda. ..... Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer ProtectionAct,1986 QUORUM Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member
For the Complainant : Sh. Ashok Gupta, 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 he is a petty shopkeeper and running shop of repair of seat covers. The complainant took the aforesaid shop on rent from Santosh Kumari for the last many years and is paying the rent regularly. The complainant is having electric connection No. B 11GT350473P in his shop and is paying the bills regularly. The said connection is in the name of Santosh Kumari. The said Santosh Kumari wants to evict the complainant from the shop on flimsy ground and has filed false rent eviction application against the complainant which is pending in the court of Sh. Karan Garg and is fixed for 10-04-2012. Santosh Kumari also gave other shops on rent and she did not deposit the electricity bills to the opposite party No. 2 to create harassment to the complainant. Previously the connections of the complainant and other tenants were disconnected due to non-payment of electricity bills of Santosh Kumari which are not related with the complainant. The complainant and other tenants moved an application before opposite party No. 2 on 21-01-2011 and requested the opposite party not to disconnect the connection of the complainant in future as the complainant is paying the electricity bills regularly and further requested to restore the electric connection immediately. The opposite parties again came to the shop of the complainant to disconnect the electric connection and demanded Rs. 35,000/- from him without disclosing anything or issuing any bill or notice. The complainant showed the receipt of payment of bill, but they directed to pay Rs. 35,000/- and threatened that otherwise connection would be disconnected and meter would be removed. The opposite parties gave the time to make the payment of Rs. 35,000/- till Monday and told that otherwise the electric meter would be removed. The complainant even requested the opposite party to accept the security and release the new connection in his name but they refused to accept the application. Hence, he has filed the present complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties not to disconnect the electric connection No. B11GT350473P; not to charge Rs. 35,000/- as nothing is due against the said connection; release new electric connection in his name after getting the charges and pay him compensation and cost. The opposite parties filed their joint written reply and took preliminary objection that complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint as the connection in question is in the name of Santosh Rani. However, they admitted that an electricity connection No. B11GT350473P is in the name of Santosh Rani. It has been pleaded that as per records of the opposite parties, there was another electricity connection in her name bearing A/c No. 35/679 against which there is an outstanding amount of Rs. 32,791/- against her. Since there is an outstanding amount in the name of Santosh Rani, the opposite parties have the right to disconnect all the electricity connections in her name for recovery of the outstanding amount. The opposite parties have pleaded that the connection is in the name of Santosh Rani and the complainant has no concern with the same as such his request for issuance of new connection could not be entertained. The electricity connections have been disconnected as per rules. The opposite parties have admitted that payment of the electricity bills with regard to the connection in question has been made by complainant on behalf of connection holder Santosh Rani. Parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings. Arguments heard. Record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused. These are undisputed facts between the parties that the electric connection in question is in the name of Santosh Rani which was given on rent to the complainant vide Ex. C-9 'Rent Agreement'. The complainant has been paying the electricity bills regularly so issued by the opposite parties against the said connection and nothing is due against him. The opposite parties have disconnected his aforesaid electric connection due to the reason that an amount of Rs. 32,791/- is outstanding against Santosh Rani, owner of the shop against her A/c No. 35/679. A perusal of 'Rent Note' Ex. C-9 reveals that the complainant has taken the shop on rent from Santosh Rani wherein the electric connection bearing A/c No. B11GT350473P has been installed. The opposite parties have admitted that complainant has been using the said connection and paying the bills on behalf of Santosh Rani. Hence, this Forum is of the view that he has the locus standi to file the present complaint being beneficiary. The opposite parties have admitted that an amount of Rs. 32,791/- is due against Santosh Rani against her A/c No. 35/679 and not against the connection of the complainant. If Santosh Rani has not paid any of her bill, the complainant cannot be saddled with her liability. Under Law a Citizen cannot be saddled with the liability of another consumer. If anybody defaults in making payment of his/her dues, Board can take recourse of law for realisation of its dues.. In other words, one consumer cannot be saddled with the liability of another consumer. There is no rule to shift one's liability upon the shoulders of another. In view of what has been discussed. This complaint is accepted against the opposite parties without any order as to costs. The opposite parties are directed to release the electric connection in question of the complainant with immediate effect i.e. on the same day on receipt of copy of this order. The complainant is directed to deliver the copy of this order to the opposite parties against receipt.
A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned to the record.
Pronounced 12-04-2012 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)
President
(Amarjeet Paul) Member
(Sukhwinder Kaur ) Member
| |
