Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/18/640

Kanwarjit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Pujab State Power Corporation Limited - Opp.Party(s)

SS Heer adv

01 Sep 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No: 640 dated 16.10.2018.                                                       Date of decision: 01.09.2022.

 

Kanwarjit Singh age about 65 years S/o. Late Sh. Prithi Paul Singh, r/o. House No.21-J, Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana, Mobile No.93168 23213.                                                                                                              ..…Complainant 

•  

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, through its Chairman, The Mall, Patiala.
2. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Aggar Nagar, Division (Special), Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana, through its Asst. Executive Engineer.                                                                                                                                                                              …..Opposite parties 

Complaint under Section 12 & 14 of the Consumer Protection    Act.

QUORUM:

SH. K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

SH. JASWINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant            :         Sh. S.S. Heer, Advocate.

For OPs                         :         Sh. Manish Midha, Advocate.

 

ORDER

PER K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

1.                In brief, the case of the complainant is that his father Prithi Paul Singh was the owner of the property/house No.B-XX-4512, 21-J, Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana which was purchased by him from the Improvement Trust, Ludhiana in the year 1968 vide sale deed dated 20.05.1988. The complainant purchased the said property from his father Prithi Paul Singh vide registered sales deed dated 20.06.2007 and 22.10.2007. On the basis of the sale deeds, the complainant became the exclusive owner of the sad property. The complainant filed civil suit bearing No.278 dated 19.11.2007 against his brother Ravinder Pal Singh and others and the said suit was decreed in favour of the complainant vide order dated 12.03.2014 passed by the court of Sh. Amrinder Pal Singh, the then Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ludhiana  whereby Ravinder Singh and his wife were directed to vacate the said property and hand over its vacant possession to the complainant. Ravinder Pal Singh and his wife preferred an appeal which was dismissed by the court of Ms. Sangeeta, Additional District Judge, Ludhiana vide judgment and decree dated 12.08.2016. Ravinder Pal Singh and his wife further filed a regular second appeal before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh  which was also dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 27.10.2016. Ravinder Pal Singh further filed SLP No.35854/2016 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India which was also dismissed vide order dated 14.12.2016.

2.                It is further alleged that Ravinder Pal Singh and his wife also filed civil suit No.256A of 19.10.2017 in respect of the property which was dismissed by the court of Sh. Gurinder Pal Singh, the then Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana vide order dated 17.12.2016. Ravinder Pal Singh filed another suit for declaration and permanent injunction which was also dismissed.

3.                It is further alleged that the complainant filed a rent petition against Ravinder Pal Singh directing him to vacate the part of the house in question. The Hon’ble Supreme Court directed Ravinder Pal Singh to vacate the premises within 18 months from the date of the order. However, in spite of undertaking, Ravinder Singh filed a civil suit No.89 dated 04.03.2009 titled as Ravinder Pal Singh Vs Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana which was subsequently withdrawn.

4.                It is further alleged that after becoming the exclusive owner of the property in question, the complainant filed an application for getting the electric connection No.W51KS171971X in his name vide application dated 05.06.2017. The complainant also deposited regular fee vide receipt dated 22.05.2017 for Rs.1150/-. In response to the application, the complainant received a memo No.4075 dated 16.08.2017 from OP2 stating that the fate of the application cannot be decided as a number of cases are pending regarding the property in question. After the receipt of the memo, the complainant wrote letter dated 23.08.2017 apprising OP2 about the status of the property in question. Thereafter, the complainant wrote another letter dated 05.09.2017 to Additional S.E., Distribution, Aggar Nagar Division Special, PSPCL, Ludhiana and informed that the complainant has already filed an ejectment petition against Ravinder Pal Singh but there is no stay regarding any portion part of the property in question. Non-transferring the connection in the name of the complainant on behalf of the OPs is illegal, null and void and against the rules and regulations of PSPCL. In the end, it has been requested that the OPs be directed to change the connection in the name of the complainant and further the OPs be made to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.11,000/-.

5.                The complaint has been resisted by the OPs. In the written statement filed on behalf of the OPs, it has been, inter alia, pleaded that the complaint is not maintainable as the dispute with regard to the house in question is pending in the civil court titled as Ravinder Pal Singh Vs Punjab State Power Corporation Limited. According to the OPs, Ravinder Pal Singh is the brother of the complainant and has claimed in the suit that he is occupying and living in the property as a member of HUF and is also a consumer of the electric connection No.W-51-KS-17-1971-X/3002506969 which he is using to run Ravindra Gas Service of which he is the sole Proprietor. Since there is a family dispute between the complainant and his brother and civil litigation is also pending, the transfer of the connection cannot be claimed. On merits, it has been admitted that the electric connection in the property stands installed in the name of Prithi Paul Singh, the father of the complainant. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied as wrong and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has also been made.

6.                In evidence, the complainant submitted his affidavit Ex. CA along with documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C27 and closed the evidence.

7.                On the other hand, the counsel for OPs tendered affidavit Ex. RA of Er. Parminder Singh, Senior Executive Engineer of the OPs along with documents Ex. R1 and Ex. R2 and closed the evidence.

8.                We have heard the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and have also gone through records.

9.                Primarily, the dispute in this case with regard to transfer of connection No.W51KS171971X which stands installed in property bearing M.C. No.B-XX-4512, 21-J, Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana which claims to have purchased from his father and previous owner Prithi Paul Singh. The OPs have claimed in para No.13 of the written statement that the transfer of the connection could not be allowed due to pendency of civil suits between the complainant and his brother Ravinder Pal Singh. The complainant claims to have obtained this property from his father on the basis of the registered exchange deeds Ex. C1 and Ex. C3. In the jamabandi Ex. C2 there is a reference of mutation in the name of the complainant. The complainant has further placed on record jamabandi Ex. C5 wherein he is stated to be the owner of the property in the ownership column of jamabandi. The complainant has further placed on record copy of judgment Ex. C6 passed by the court of Sh. Amrinderpal Singh, Addl. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ludhiana whereby the suit filed by the complainant against his brother and sister-in-law was decided in his favour and the defendants namely Ravinder Pal Singh and his wife Arvinder Kaur were directed to vacate the premises within 6 months. Ravinder Pal Singh and his wife preferred an appeal in the court of Addl. District Judge, Ludhiana which was dismissed vide judgment Ex. C8 passed by the court of Ms. Sanjeeta, Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. An appeal further field by Ravinder Pal Singh and his wife with Hon’ble High Court was also dismissed vide judgment Ex. C10 dated 27.10.2016. A SLP filed against the judgment dated 27.10.2016 has also been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide judgment Ex. C17. A Civil suit filed by Arvinder Kaur and Ravinder Pal Singh against the complainant and his father Prithi Paul Singh seeking injunction was also dismissed by the court of Sh. Gurinder Pal Singh, Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana vide judgment dated 17.12.2016, copy of which is Ex. C12 on the file. It is, thus evident from the record available on the file that the civil litigation regarding the property in question has been decided in favour of the complainant up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court and has, thus, attained finality with the result that there remains absolutely no doubt about the fact that the complainant has become the legitimate owner of the property in question.

10.              The only objection raised by the OPs in the written statement regarding the change/transfer of the connection installed in the property in question was that some litigation between the complainant and his brother was pending. Since the litigation has already attained the finality up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, even this objection raised on behalf of the OPs has been rendered in-fructuous. In the given circumstances, the OPs are under an obligation to transfer the connection in question in favour of the complainant in accordance with the Electricity Supply Instructions Manual, 2017. In the given circumstances, we are of the considered view that it would be just and proper if the OPs are directed to consider the application field by the complainant strictly in accordance with the Electricity Supply Instructions Manual, 2017.

11.              As a result of above discussion, the complaint is partly allowed with an order that the OPs shall consider and allow the application of the complainant for transfer of application in question in the name of the complainant in accordance with Electricity Supply Instructions Manual, 2017 and subject to the fulfillment of the condition, if any, given in the said manual within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

12.              Due to rush of work and spread of COVID-19, the case could not be decided within statutory period.

 

                             (Jaswinder Singh)                            (K.K. Kareer)

                    Member                                           President

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:01.09.2022.

Gobind Ram.

Kanwarjit Singh Vs Punjab State Power Corp. Ltd.                CC/18/640

Present:       Sh. S.S. Heer, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh. Munish Midha, Advocate for the OPs.

 

                   Arguments heard. Vide separate detailed order of today, the complaint is partly allowed with an order that the OPs shall consider and allow the application of the complainant for transfer of application in question in the name of the complainant in accordance with Electricity Supply Instructions Manual, 2017 and subject to the fulfillment of the condition, if any, given in the said manual within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

                             (Jaswinder Singh)                            (K.K. Kareer)

                    Member                                           President

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:01.09.2022.

Gobind Ram.