DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.339 of 2017
Date of institution: 08.05.2017 Date of decision : 29.11.2018
Smt. Usha Rani aged about 39 years wife of Shri Randeep Singh, resident of village Jhanjheri, Tehsil Kharar, District SAS Nagar, Mohali.
…….Complainant
Versus
1. PSPCL through its Chairman, The Mall Road, Patiala at Patiala.
2. The Xen 230 KV Sub Station, Khanpur (Kharar), District SAS Nagar, Mohali.
3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Kharar, City Kharar, District SAS Nagar, Mohali.
……..Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of
the Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Shri G.K. Dhir, President,
Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member.
Present: Ms. Jaspreet Kaur Somal, counsel for complainant.
Shri Pankaj Sharma, counsel for the OPs.
Order by :- Shri G.K. Dhir, President.
Order
Complainant submitted form A &A for domestic supply (DS) for 3 KV on 05.05.2016 with OP No.3. Requisite security was also deposited and as such it is claimed that in view of Section 43 of Electricity Act, 2003, it was obligatory for OPs to issue connection within one month of acceptance of application. Complainant kept on running from pillar to post, but electricity connection has not been released. Rather office of OP No.3 served letter regarding cancellation of application on the ground that 70 meter cable for installation of electricity connection is required, but complainant not providing the same. Despite service of legal notice dated 21.03.2017, OPs failed to provide requisite services and that is why by pleading deficiency in service on part of OPs, this complaint filed for directing OPs to install electricity connection and even to pay penalty of Rs.1,000/- per day. Compensation for mental agony and harassment of Rs.5.00 lakhs and litigation expenses of Rs.50,000/- more claimed.
2. In reply submitted in the shape of affidavit, it is pleaded inter alia that complaint is not maintainable because despite issue of memo No.281 dated 27.02.2017, complainant has not deposited requisite charges; OPs have been dragged unnecessarily by filing this false and frivolous complaint despite the fact that complainant has no locus standi. Complainant has to bear expenses of extra wire upto residence as per rules and notice in that respect issued, but despite that charges of 70 meter of extra wire has not been deposited by complainant. Office of PSPCL can only provide wire upto 100 meters, but beyond that expenses had to be borne by consumer as per policy of PSPCL. Admittedly application for release of connection has already been cancelled by office of PSPCL, Kharar and in response to legal notice sent by complainant to OPs, reply thereof has been sent.
3. Complainant to prove her case tendered in evidence her affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 alongwith affidavit Ex.CW-1/2 of Bharat Singh and documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-7 and thereafter closed evidence. On the other hand counsel for the OPs tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.OP-1/1 of Er. Satpreet Singh Bajwa and thereafter closed evidence.
4. Written arguments submitted by both the parties. Oral arguments heard and records gone through.
5. From pleadings of parties and contents of application Ex.C-1, copy of test report Ex.C-2 and letter written by complainant to Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Ex.C-4, it is made out that complainant applied for domestic electricity connection. Denial of that fact has not been done by OPs in their reply. However, it is the claim of Ops that as extra 70 meters of wire required for providing electricity connection and as such complainant had to bear expenses for the same. Notice Ex.C-5 in that respect was issued by OPs to complainant, but complainant has not deposited the charges of 70 meters of wire and as such it is contended that application has been cancelled rightly. However, during course of arguments counsel for complainant after going through Rule 9.1.1 contained in Chapter-IV of PSPCL Code claimed that complainant ready to deposit 70 meter wire charges with OPs or its officials. Above quoted rule 9.1.1 provides that where length of service line for purpose of providing electricity connection exceeds the limit, then consumer has to pay the variable charges for the additional length of service line alongwith KW/KVA charges at the rates approved by Commission in the standard cost data. So certainly in view of this rule, complainant is duty bound to deposit 70 meter wire charges with OPs or its officials and on such deposit OPs duty bound to install domestic electricity connection. Notice Ex.C-5 not shown to be served on complainant and as such in view of mandatory provisions of Section 43 of Indian Electricity Act to provide electricity connection within 30 days of filing of application, it has to be held that complainant stood dragged in this litigation by OPs due to non service of Ex.C-5 on complainant. So complainant entitled for compensation for mental agony and harassment and to litigation expenses, but of reasonable amount.
6. As a sequel of above discussion, the complaint allowed with direction to OPs to install domestic electric meter applied for by complainant within 30 days from the date of deposit of 70 meters wire charges by complainant with the OPs or its officials. Compensation for mental agony and harassment of Rs.2,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.2,000/- more allowed in favour of complainant and against OP. Payment of amount of compensation and litigation expenses be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. Certified copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Announced
November 29, 2018.
(G.K. Dhir)
President
(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)
Member
