BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MOGA.<br /> <br /> Complaint No.108 of 2008<br /> Date of Institution:05.09.2008<br /> Date of Service:26.09.2008<br /> Date of Decision:18.11.2008<br /> <br /> Kaka Singh (aged 50 years) son of Gurcharan Singh, resident of Nihal Singh Wala, Madhe Road, Chowkidar Basti, Tehsil: Nihal Singh Wala, Distt.Moga.<br /> Complainant.<br /> Versus<br /> <br /> 1. 1. Punjab State Electricity Board, through its Secretary, The Mall, Patiala.<br /> 2. Executive Engineer, Punjab State Electricity Board, Bagha Purana, Distt.Moga.<br /> 3. Sub Divisional Officer, Punjab State Electricity Board, Patto Hira Singh, Distt. Moga.<br /> Opposite parties. <br /> <br /> Complaint under section 12 of The<br /> Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> Quorum: Sh.J.S.Chawla, President<br /> Smt.Bhupinder Kaur, Member<br /> <br /> Present: Sh.P.S.Sidhu, Adv.counsel for the complainant.<br /> Sh.R.K.Goyal, Adv.counsel for the OPs.<br /> <br /> (J.S.CHAWLA, PRESIDENT)<br /> Sh.Kaka Singh complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein-after referred to as ‘Act’) against Punjab State Electricity Board through its Secretary and others-opposite parties (herein-after referred to as ‘Board’) directing them to quash the illegal demand of Rs.45152/- raised vide memo no.1752 dated 14.08.2008 and also to pay Rs.20000/- as compensation for causing mental tension and harassment beside costs of litigation.<br /> 2. Briefly stated, Sh.Kaka Singh complainant is a ‘consumer’ of the OPs-Board having domestic electric connection bearing account no.NC64/0684 installed at his residential premises having sanctioned load of 1.90 KW. That the complainant has been using the said premises and paying the consumption charges regularly and nothing is due against him. That the complainant received a notice no.1752 dated 14.08.2008 in which OPs-Board raised a demand of Rs.45152/- on account of ‘theft of energy’. That the complainant never committed any ‘theft of energy’. That the complainant approached the office of OPs-Board time and again and requested to withdraw the impugned amount, but to no effect. That the said demand is altogether illegal, unjust, void at law and against the rules and regulations of the PSEB. That the aforesaid act and conduct of the OPs-Board had caused great inconvenience, harassment and mental agony to him for which he has claimed Rs.20000/- as compensation beside costs of the litigation. Hence, the present complaint.<br /> 3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs-Board, who appeared through Sh.R.K.Goyal Advocate and filed written reply contesting the same. They took up preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form; that the complainant has no locus standie to file the present complaint; that the complainant has concealed the material facts from the knowledge of this Forum and that this Forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint. On merits, it was averred that in fact on 16.07.2008, Sh.Harmail Singh Malli AAE alongwith other officials of the OPs-Board checked the premises of the complainant and found him using the electric supply by illegal means i.e. by using the direct wire by bye-passing the electric meter. The complainant was also found using the excess load to the extent of 5.946 KW and they declared it as a case of ‘theft of energy’. The checking was conducted in the presence of the complainant, who duly signed the checking report. Thereafter, memo no.1752 dated 14.08.2008 was issued to the complainant demanding Rs.45152/- under section 126 of Electricity Act, 2003 on account of ‘theft of energy’ and using excess load to which the OPs-Board is legally entitled to recover. All other allegations contained in the complaint were specifically denied being wrong and incorrect. Hence, it was prayed that the complaint filed by the complainant has no merit and it deserves dismissal.<br /> 4. In order to prove his case, the complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.A1, notice Ex.A2, bills Ex.A3 to Ex.A8 and closed his evidence.<br /> 5. To rebut the evidence of the complainant, the OPs-Board tendered in evidence joint affidavit of Sh.Damanjit Singh Toor, Executive Engineer and Sh.Nek Singh, SDO Ex.R1, affidavit of Harmel Singh Malli Ex.R2, copy of checking report Ex.R3, copy of detail Ex.R4, copy of notice Ex.R5 and closed their evidence.<br /> 6. We have heard the arguments of Sh.P.S.Sidhu ld. counsel for the complainant and Sh.R.K.Goyal ld.counsel for the OPs-Board and have very carefully perused the evidence on the file.<br /> 7. Sh.P.S.Sidhu ld. counsel for the complainant has mainly argued that the impugned demand of Rs.45152/- raised vide notice no.1752 dated 14.08.2008 from the complainant is illegal and unlawful because the complainant had never indulged in ‘theft of energy’. <br /> 8. On the other hand, Sh.R.K.Goyal ld.counsel for the OPs-Board has mainly argued that in fact on 16.07.2008, Sh.Harmail Singh Malli AAE alongwith other officials of the OPs-Board checked the premises of the complainant and found him using the electric supply by illegal means i.e. by using the direct wire by bye-passing the electric meter. The complainant was also found using the excess load to the extent of 5.946 KW and they declared it as a case of ‘theft of energy’. The checking was conducted in the presence of the complainant, who duly signed the checking report. This contention of the ld.counsel for the OPs-Board has full force. Admittedly, on <br /> 16.07.2008, Sh.Harmail Singh Malli AAE alongwith other officials of the OPs-Board checked the premises of the complainant and found him using the electric supply in the aforesaid manners. The checking was conducted in the presence of the complainant, who duly signed the checking report. Thereafter, memo no.1752 dated 14.08.2008 was issued to the complainant demanding Rs.45152/- under section 126 of Electricity Act, 2003 on account of ‘theft of energy’. <br /> 9. Moreover, under the new Electricity Act, 2003 this Forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try this complaint because the only remedy available to the complainant is first to file objections and then to file an appeal under section 127 of the Electricity Act 2003 before the Appellant Authority i.e. Divisional Commissioner/ Addl. Deputy Commissioner or Sub Divisional Magistrate as the case may be, against the orders of the Assessing Officer made under section 126 of the said Act. The complainant neither filed objections against the provisional order of assessment nor filed appeal under the said provisions. Hence, in view of the latest provisions of Electricity Act 2003 and circulars of the PSEB, this Forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try this complaint on account of ‘theft of energy’ in the aforesaid manners. <br /> 10. Furthermore, the charge of theft has been proved from the checking report Ex.R3 and affidavit Ex.R2 of Sh.Harmail Singh Malli, AAE, PSEB Bagha Purana, checking officer. To corroborate it, the OPs-Board has also produced joint affidavit Ex.R1 of Sh.Damanjit Singh Executive Engineer and Sh.Nek Singh, SDO, copy of calculation sheet Ex.R4 and copy of notice Ex.R5.<br /> 11. On the other hand, the complainant has failed to lead any cogent and convincing evidence to prove that he was not committing ‘theft of electricity’ except his own affidavit Ex.A1. There is no corroboration to his affidavit that he was not stealing the electricity by illegal means. Moreover, he has reason to give false affidavit in order to save himself from the consequences of being caught red handed while stealing the electricity by illegal means. Thus, no reliance could be placed on the affidavit Ex.A1 of the complainant and we discard the same.<br /> 12. Further, the checking party had acted in accordance with rules and regulations issued by PSEB from time to time and in discharge of their official duties. They were supposed to do all their acts bonafidely and in good faith and without any malice or motive. The complainant has not alleged any ill-will or animus against them. They have no reason to make a wrong report against him. In view of these circumstances, we hold that on 16.07.2008 the complainant was found stealing the electricity by aforesaid illegal means. Thus, the impugned demand of Rs.45152/- made from the complainant on account of ‘theft of energy’ by the OPs-Board was quite legal and valid and as per rules and instructions of the PSEB. Hence, the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency of service on the part of the OPs-Board. <br /> 13. The ld.counsel for the parties did not urge or argue any other point before us.<br /> 14. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the complaint filed by the complainant has no merit and the same is dismissed. In view of the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the order shall be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter, the file be consigned to the record room.<br /> <br /> (Bhupinder Kaur) (J.S.Chawla)<br /> Member President<br /> <br /> Announced in Open Forum.<br /> Dated:18.11.2008.<br /> hrg*<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />