(SAT PAUL GARG, MEMBER)
1. Present complaint under Section 12 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein-after in short to be referred as ‘Act’) has been filed by Sh.Kuldeep Kumar s/o Sh.Aschraj Lal, resident of 1161, Basant Avenue, Dugri, Ludhiana (herein-after in short to be referred as ‘complainant’) against Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall, Patiala, through its Chairman/M.D. and others (herein-after in short to be referred as ‘OPs’)- directing them to quash the demand raised by them, to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation to the complainant for the damages and loss suffered by the complainant and further Ops are directed to connect the electric supply.
2. Brief facts of the complaint are that complainant had purchased the above said property on 9.12.10 as stated in the head note of the complaint and thereafter the complainant started residing in the above noted property in the month of March, 2011 and also applied for a connection in his name and as such in the month of March, 2011 the Ops issued the connection in the name of the complainant and since then the complainant is using the electricity supply through the connection and is paying the electricity charges of the supply time to time to the Ops. The complainant after receiving the bill July, 2014 issued by the Ops for the electricity consumption of the complainant for the said relevant period was astonished to see the bill, as the Ops have raised an arrears of Rs.16,711/- in the said bill of the complainant. Thereafter the complainant approached the OP1 and the concerned officials apprised of the complainant that arrears of Rs.16,711/- was pertaining to some other connection bearing Khata no.TY-6674. The complainant requested the Ops to immediately withdraw the said amount, but the Ops flatly refused to accept the genuine request of the complainant. Thereafter on 1.8.14 the complainant was out of station. The officials of the Ops without informing the complainant or any of his family members disconnected the electricity supply to the connection of the complainant from outside as the meter of the complainant was installed in the street. The complainant as well as his son approached the officials of the Ops and requested them to restore the electricity supply to their connection and to withdraw the said illegal demand, but the said officials did not accept the most genuine request of the complainant and the officials of the Ops provided one photocopy of the demand notice dated 17.2.14 in concern of the above said demand and threatened the complainant to deposit the same, otherwise the electricity supply will not be resumed. The Ops have also removed the meter of the complainant without informing him or any of this family members. As such, the Ops have neither any right to raise any such alleged demand nor they have any right to disconnect the electricity supply to the meter in question on the basis of the above said illegal demand. Claiming the above act as deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, the complainant has filed this complaint.
3. On notice of the complaint, Ops appeared through their counsel and filed written statement taking preliminary objections that complaint file dbythe complainant is false and frivolous; the complainant has concealed material facts from this Forum. True facts are that earlier electric connection of Temporary Category bearing account no.TY-6674 was laying installed in the premises and against outstanding amount of Rs.16,711/- and meter of said connection was removed. However, complainant got installed new connection in the same premises under account no.UH-04-2547 by concealing this fact and made false declaration in A & A form that no amount of any kind is outstanding against the said premises against any person, where he wants to get new connection. However, notice Memo no.251 dated 17.2.14 was issued to complainant and complainant was directed to deposit defaulting amount of Rs.16711 within 7 days from date of receipt of notice or face disconnection of electric connection, but inspite of that complainant failed to deposit the said defaulting amount to Ops, so connection of complainant was disconnected by Ops after serving notice and can be restored only when whole amount of Rs.16711/- is deposited with the Ops. On merits, denying the contents of all other paras prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
4. Ld. Counsel for complainant has adduced the evidence by way of duly sworn affidavit of Ex.CA, wherein, the same facts have been reiterated as narrated in the complaint and also submitted documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C6. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for Ops has adduced the evidence by way of duly sworn affidavit of Sh.Sanjeev Parbhakar, Additional S.E. Model Town, Division Special, PSPC Ltd. Ex.RA, wherein, he deposed that detailed reply of Ops may kindly be read as part of evidence in shape of affidavit of Ops alongwith documents Ex.R1 and Ex.R2.
5. Both the parties lead their oral arguments. Ld. Counsel for the complainant argued that he has been paying the bills regularly for the consumption. The Ops have made a old arrear qua the connection no.TY-6674 to the tune of Rs.16,711/- without proving as to how the complainant is liable to pay the arrear qua temporary connection and also pleaded his case relying upon the case SDO, DHBVNL and another Vs Saroj Devi-II (2011) CPJ 378, whereby Hon’ble Haryana State Commission, Panchkula has held that bill in question relates to period when complainant was not owner of house. Complainant cannot be burdened with impugned bill. Ops at liberty to recover due amount from previous owner of house and also produced the copy of the Section 56 of The Electricity Act, 2003, wherein as per the section 56 (2) the arrears pertaining to the period of two years from the date when such sum became first due unless such sum has been shown continuously as recoverable as arrear of charges for electricity supplied and the licensee shall not cut off the supply of the electricity.
6. Ld. Counsel for the Ops argued that since the temporary connection was also installed in the same premises and the complainant obtained the new connection by concealing the fact that the arrears of Rs.16,711/- was due qua that temporary connection installed on the said premises and as such, the Ops wrote the letter to the complainant vide memo no.251 dated 13.2.14 that defaulting amount of Rs.16,711/- was outstanding towards the complainant, since the TY connection was installed in his house and the complainant was required to deposit the same within 7 days, which he failed to do. As such, the supply was disconnected from the premises of the complainant.
7. We have gone through the pleadings of the complainant as well as defence taken by the Ops and have also perused the entire record placed on file.
8. It is evident that the old arrears of Rs.16,711/- were due qua the temporary connection, which the complainant refused to accept. Thus the arrears were prior to the period when the complainant purchased this house on 9.12.10 and occupied the same in the month of March, 2011 and thereafter applied for the new connection in the month of March, 2011. The old arrears were not in the knowledge of the complainant. So, the complainant is not liable to pay old arrears especially in light of the section 56 (2) of the electric connection 2003. The OPs have also not been able to prove as to how the complainant was liable to pay old arrears qua the old TY connection of someone else. Moreover the property is purchased after verifying the revenue record and such type of arrears are not reflected in the revenue record.
9. Sequel to the above discussion, the present complaint is allowed and the demand of Rs.16,711/- is hereby quashed. Further Ops are directed to pay Rs.2000/-(Two thousand only) as compensation and litigation expenses compositely assessed to the complainant. Order be complied within 30 days of receipt of the copy of the order, which be made available to the parties, free of costs. File be consigned to record room.
(S.P.Garg) (R.L.Ahuja)
Member President
Announced in Open Forum.
Dated:21.01.2015
Hardeep Singh
