Complainant Smt.Mala Rani  has filed the present complaint against the opposite party U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (for short, C.P.Act.) seeking necessary directions to the opposite party to  set aside the demand of Rs.3504/- raised by the opposite party. Opposite party be further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- for harassment and litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.

2.        The case of the complainant in brief is that she is resident of village Bal, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur. That she is having one electric connection in her house since last two years. That opposite party has illegally raised a demand of Rs.3504/- from her by way of sending a bill. It is next pleaded that the arrears of Rs.3504/- are of previous 25-30 years old and that too does not belong to her and as such the same may be set aside/waived. The complainant further submitted that the disconnected meter be restored at the earliest.

3.       Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite parties who appeared through their counsel and filed their written reply taking the preliminary objections that the complaint of the complainant is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of the necessary parties; the complainant has filed the false and frivolous  case with the intention to take undue advantage of the process of law; the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands and had concealed the material facts intentionally and deliberately and the present complaint is not maintainable in the present form. On merits, it was submitted that one electric meter bearing account no.RK 52/319 was sanctioned in the name of Diwan Chand in the same premises, where the electric meter bearing no.RK 55/1064 is installed. The complainant has purchased the premises, hence the opposite party demanded the outstanding amount of the Khata no.RK 52/319 from the account no.RK 55/1064 which is sanctioned in the name of complainant. The amount demanded by the opposite parties is legal and genuine. There is no deficiency on the part of the opposite party.

4.      Complainant tendered into evidence her own affidavit Ex.C1 and ex.C2, alongwith other documents Ex.C3 to Ex.C5 and closed the evidence. 

5.       Counsel for the opposite party tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Kasturi Lal SDO PSPCLtd. Ex.OP-1, alongwith other document Ex.OP2 and closed the evidence.

6.       We have carefully gone through the pleadings of both the parties; arguments advanced by their respective counsels and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsels for the purposes of adjudication of the present complaint.

7.         Complainant has produced on record photo copy of the bill dated 31.05.2015 Ex.C-5 in which opposite party demanded Rs.3504/- as arrears and asked the complainant to deposit Rs.3504/-. Opposite party in its written version submitted that one electric meter bearing account no.RK 52/319 was sanctioned in the name of Diwan Chand in the same premises, where the electric meter bearing no.RK 55/1064 is installed. The complainant has purchased the premises, hence the opposite party demanded the outstanding amount of the Khata no.RK 52/319 from the account no.RK 55/1064 which is sanctioned in the name of complainant. The amount demanded by the opposite parties is legal and genuine. It is well settled that a new connection is not released to a consumer until previous arrears are cleared by the previous connection holder. It has not been made clear by the opposite party as to under what law and under which rules and regulations they are seeking to recover the amount of Rs.3504/- clearly pertaining to electric connection bearing account No. RK 52/319. It has not been explained by the opposite party as to why they remained dormant and in deep slumber and  suddenly waked up to illegally add the amount pertaining to electric connection bearing account No. no.RK 52/319 in the electric connection bearing account No. RK 55/1064 installed in the property where earlier connection bearing No.RK 52/319 was installed. In our considered opinion complainant cannot be burdened with this amount for the simple reason that he was neither the consumer of electric connection bearing account No.RK 52/319. Opposite party could very well have gone after the actual consumer in whose name this electric connection was installed and who has consumed the electricity from this electric connection instead of illegally seeking to recover this amount from the complainant, who is not at all liable to pay this amount. We draw support from IV(2004) CLT 622 wherein it has been held by the Hon'ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in case ‘Punjab State Electricity Board Versus Garjit Kaur’ that:-

“No law shown which permitted the amount outstanding against one connection that could be added in the bill of another connection if the demanded related to the same consumer.”

 It is further stated in para No.7 of this judgment that :-

“It is an admitted case of the parties that the demand in dispute related to another connection bearing account no. CF 75/0487 and the same was added to the account of the complainant. The demand made by the opposite parties related to the connection, which was in the name of Surya Kiran A.C. Market Welfare Society. The said amount under the rules of the opposite party itself as has not been denied by the learned counsel for the appellants could not be added to the account of the complainant. In these circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the District Forum. All these appeals, namely, Appeal Nos. 746 to 753 of 2003 are, thus, dismissed in limini. It is, however, ordered that the opposite parties are at liberty to demand and secure the payment with regard to the energy consumed from any other consumer from whom it is due.”

8.      When the facts of the present case are viewed in the light of the law laid down in the case law discussed in the preceding paragraph, it becomes amply clear that the demand raised by the opposite party pertaining to electric connection bearing account No.RK 52/319 and sought to be charged against electric connection bearing account No. RK 55/1064 is manifestly unjust and illegal and such a demand is not sustainable in the eyes of law.

9.        In view of the above discussion, complaint is partly allowed and demand raised by the opposite party in respect of the electric connection bearing account No.RK 52/319 in the name of Diwan Chand from the complainant is hereby set-aside. Opposite party would also pay Rs.3000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. In case complainant has paid any amount out of the impugned amount during the pendency of the proceedings that is ordered to be refunded forthwith. Compliance of the orders be made within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of orders; failing which proceedings u/s 27 of the Consumer Protection Act would be initiated against the opposite party.

10.              Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned.                                                                                                                                                            

        (Naveen Puri)

                                                                            President   

Announced:                                                   (Jagdeep Kaur)

February,09 2016                                                  Member

*MK*