<br /> Present: Sh. Ajay Gandhi counsel for the complainant.<br /> Sh. Rajneesh Garg counsel for the opposite parties.<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> DHARAM SINGH PRESIDENT<br /> Lalit Kumar complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 requiring the opposite parties to withdraw the notice No. 1544 dated 11.12.2006 and not to charge any amount on the basis of this notice and not to disconnect the electric connection on the basis of notice and to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the complainant for causing mental tension, harassment and unnecessary expenses for visiting different officials besides Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses. <br /> 2. The complainant averred in its complaint that the complainant is a consumer of the opposite parties holding three phase electric connection running for the last many years in the name of his father Keshav Ram since deceased few years back bearing account No. DF 36/0500 in the premises of the complainant. The opposite parties officials on 25.11.2005 removed the old electric meter from the above said premises and they also said they have removed the meter as they went to change new electronic meter and at that time the meter was correct in working condition with intact seal etc. and officials did not point out any shortcoming or defect to the complainant and no signatures were taken by them regarding removal of meter. After one year from the removal of the meter a notice was served upon the complainant unauthorized use of electricity in exercise of power, whereas after 25.11.2005 no sort of information was given to the complainant regarding status and any shortcoming and no meter was checked or tested in the presence of the complainant and no opportunity was given and even when the meter was removed it was not sealed as per required norms and they charge Rs.9823/- for unauthorized use of electricity. The complainant was unable to deposit electricity charges which were deposited by getting relief of depositing in installments. So it is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant approached the higher authorities of the Electricity Board for the removal of grievances of the complainant but they are not going to listen to the complainant. The complainant requested the opposite parties to withdraw the notice but they refused to admit the claim of the complainant. The act and conduct of the opposite parties caused great mental tension, harassment to the complainant for which the complainant claims a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses. Hence this complaint. <br /> 3. The counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 19.7.2007 complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties. <br /> 4. On receipt of the notice, the opposite parties appeared through Sh. Rajneesh Garg Advocate and filed written reply in which they submitted that the complainant is not a consumer of opposite parties as defined under the Consumer Protection Act. The present complaint in the present form is not maintainable. The complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint. It is admitted that the electricity meter was removed from the premises in the presence of the complainant and the same immediately sealed and packed. Then the same was sent to ME Lab for checking and the complainant was informed about the same and the complainant gave the undertaking that he has no objection if the meter is checked in his absence. So the meter was checked and it was found that meter was tampered. So the complainant was committing theft and meter was working slow. As such the complainant was served a notice with the request to deposit the amount. The complainant was using the electricity illegally. The complainant has concealed the material facts from the Hon'ble Forum and has not come with clean hands. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The opposite parties have not caused any mental tension or harassment to the complainant rather the complainant is harassing the opposite parties by filing false and frivolous complaint. So he is not entitled to any compensation. Hence the complaint be dismissed with costs. <br /> 5. Both the parties wanted to lead evidence to prove their respective pleadings and proper opportunity was given to them. The complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1, death certificate Ex.C-2, notice dated 11.12.2006 Ex.C-3, application dated 31.5.2007 Ex.C-4, copy of receipt dated 29.3.2007 Ex.C-5, receipt dated 21.5.2007 Ex.C-6, copy of receipt No. 331 Ex.C-7, copy of electricity bill dated 1.12.2006 Ex.C-8, copy of calculation sheet Ex.C-9 and closed his evidence. <br /> 6. In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant the opposite parties tendered in their evidence affidavit of Sh. Major Singh , AAE, PSEB, Jaitu Ex.R-1, checking report Ex.R-2, copy of register Ex.R-3, consent letter dated 17.11.2006 Ex.R-4 and closed their evidence. <br /> 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have very carefully gone through the affidavits and documents on the file. Our observations and findings are as under.<br /> 8. Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the complainant is not liable to make payment of Rs.9823/- as demanded by the opposite parties from the complainant. The demand is illegal, null and void. <br /> 9. Learned counsel for the opposite parties has submitted that as per report of ME Lab the complainant had been committing theft of energy. <br /> 10. From the perusal of the report of the checking of the meter it is found that meter was removed and seal packed in presence of the complainant. He had given in writing for checking of the meter in his absence. The complainant had cut lash wire and ME seals. The complainant in the meter have changed the polarity to commit theft of energy.<br /> 11. In consent Ex.R-4 the complainant had no objection if meter could have been checked in his absence. The opposite parties have prepared calculation sheet Ex.C-9 for making payment of Rs.9823/- in accordance with law. Even as per the application Ex.C-4 complainant had admitted with regard to checking of the meter in ME Lab. <br /> 12. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances the complainant have committing theft of energy and is not entitled to the relief claimed for and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. So the complaint being devoid of merits is dismissed. No order as to costs due to peculiar circumstances of the case. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room. <br /> Announced in open Forum:<br /> Dated: 4.4.2008<br /> <br />