Haryana

Sirsa

CC/23/37

Subhash Chander - Complainant(s)

Versus

SDO DHBVN - Opp.Party(s)

Complainant/

20 Mar 2024

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/23/37
( Date of Filing : 23 Jan 2023 )
 
1. Subhash Chander
House NO 434 Gali No 1 Prem Sethi Wali Gali Sirsa
Sirsa
Haryana
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. SDO DHBVN
Sirsa
Sirsa
Haryana
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Padam Singh Thakur PRESIDENT
  Sukhdeep Kaur MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Complainant/, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 PK Kocher, Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 20 Mar 2024
Final Order / Judgement


BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.      
Consumer Complaint no. 37 of 2023 Date of Institution :    23.01.2023.
Date of Decision :    20.03.2024.
Subhash Chander, aged about 65 years son of Des Raj, resident of H. No. 434 Gali No. 1, Prem Sethi Wali Gali, Inderpuri, Band Gate Sirsa Haryana. 
              ……Complainant.
Versus.
Sub Divisional Officer, DHBVN, Industrial Sub Division Near National Govt. College, Sirsa. 
...…Opposite party.
            Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR …………PRESIDENT MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………………MEMBER.
Present: Complainant in person.
Sh. P.K. Kochar, Advocate for opposite party.
ORDER
The present complaint has been filed by complainant for granting of permanent injunction against the disconnection of his supply for not paying the last bill dated 07.01.2023 including arrears till the final decision of the complaint by the Hon’ble Consumer Forum, secondly direct the opposite party (hereinafter referred as OP)  not to charge any arrear except the current bill. 
2.       In brief, the case of the complainant is that complainant is availing the service of OP and having old electricity connection No. 1132101USA2407659 and new account No. 3785370000 earlier in the name of Vimla Devi old owner of the house of complainant. The grievance of the complainant against the bills and arrears of the bills after the burnet meter was changed by the OP. Despite the repeated request and visiting the office of OP the same has been rejected by the Head Office and the OP alleged that they are rightly claim the bills on the basis of average consumption of the burnet meter as well as after installation of on the average of new meter. Hence, this complaint. 
3.        On notice, op appeared and filed written statement taking preliminary objections that complaint is neither maintainable nor sustainable in the present form that the complainant has not come to the Hon’ble Commission with clean hands and concealed the true and material facts, the electricity connection is still in the name of Vimla Devi. As per sale circular No. D95/2001,  a new clause “21A” “when there is transfer of ownership or right of occupancy of premises the registered consumer shall intimate the transfer of right of occupancy of the premises within 15 days to the Assistant Engineer/Assistant Executive Engineer concerned. Intimation having been received. The service shall be disconnected unless application for transfer is allowed, if the transferee desired to enjoy the eservice connection, he shall pay the outstanding dues if any to the Nigam and apply for transfer of the service connection within 30 days by furnishing fresh security. New connection shall be allotted in such case canceling the previous number”. There is no deficiency in service. Reply on merit, the old meter of the consumer has been changed on 19.03.2022 vide MCO book no. 415 serial No. 015 with new one and at that time the removed meter was found totally burnt and reading not visible. Checking report LL-1 was also prepared on the spot vide book No. 11009 serial No. 39 dated 19.03.2022 and at that time no material was found for packing and in view of the aforesaid reasons the bill issued to consumer was valid, there is no irregularity as per record of Nigam bills issued to the consumer for the period of 15.05.2021 to 07.03.2022 on the average basis and after that bills issued for the period of 07.03.2022 to 13.05.2022. All the bills issued by the OP have been justified being legal and genuine and prayed for dismissal of the complaint being without any merits regarding the bills.   
4.         The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex. C-1 and bills Ex. C-2 Ex. C-3 request for change of burnt meter to SDO Industrial Sub Division Sirsa, Ex. C-4  electric bill, Ex. C-5 LL-1 Checking report, Ex. C-6 draft electricity right of consumer rules 2020, Ex. C-7 to Ex. C-9 application to transfer the electric connection from Vimal Devi  to the name of complainant and photocopy of sale deed, Ex. C-10 to Ex. C-12, Ex. C-14 to Ex. C-16 Bills, Ex. C-13 consumer complaint form filed by the Vimla Devi for overhauling the bills, Ex. C-17 rectification of electric bills issued by the OP on checking of LL-1 report, Ex. C-18 receipt of Rs. 1712 paid of electricity bill which was issued in the name of Vimla Devi, Ex. C-19 Legal Notice, Ex. C-20 reply to the legal notice, Ex. C-21 reply to the reply of legal notice.
 5.        On the other hand, ops have tendered affidavit of Sh. Virender Singh, SDO as Ex.R1 and documents Ex. R-2 consumer complaint form, Ex. R-3 meter change order MC order, Ex. R-4 LL-1 report, Ex. R-5 to Ex. R-10 bills, Ex. R-11 overhauling, Ex. R-12 recovery of outstanding dues from the defaulting premises sales circular No. D-95/2001. 
6.        We have heard complainant as well as learned counsel for the op and have gone through the case file.
7.          Though complainant have alleged that he has purchased the house from Vimla Devi and despite the repeated request of complainant to OP to get transfer the electric connection in the name of complainant, the OP had not transferred the electric connection in his name and prayed for the OP may kindly be directed to get transfer electric connection in his name and restrained from claiming the electricity arrears bills from the complainant. 
8.          On the other hand counsel for OP contended that complainant is not consumer as he has never applied within 15 days after acquiring the ownership of the house of Vimla Devi and get the connection in his name by depositing the fresh security as per sales circular No. D-95/2001. All the formalities of applications MCO order and the previous bills and the subsequent bills after LL-1 report has been issued in the name of Vimla Devi. The case of complainant is without any cause of action. Counsel for OP further relief upon the order passed by Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh in Civil Writ No. 1759 of 2018 decided on 06.03.2018 in case titled as M/s Shubh Amantran Vs. Permanent Lok Adalat (PUS), SAS Nagar, Mohali and others in which the electric connection was in the name of Harmohan Singh and the bill was challenged after the change of burnt meter by the petitioner Shubh Amantran. The permanent Lok Adalat has come to a conclusion that there is no relationship of petitioner as consumer with the OP(respondent), therefore the application filed at its instance as a lessee is not maintainable. In the present complaint the complainant had not get transfer the electric connection of Vimla Devi by furnishing security with the OP and there is no relationship of consumer between the complainant and OP. Therefore, the present complaint is not maintainable since the complainant is not consumer. More so, the complainant has sought the relief of permanent injunction not to disconnect his electric connection and restrained the OP from recovering the electricity bills issued by the OP on the basis of average consumption of burnt meter and thereafter Ex. R-10 bill and Ex. R-11 is overhauling the bills of complainant on the basis of average consumption after the installation of new meter. Meaning thereby there is no discrepancy in the bills.
9.         This Commission is of the opinion that since the complainant is not the consumer of the OP and if the complainant is having the grievance regarding the consumption of electricity bills issued to him after overhauling of the account which was in the name of Smt. Vimla Devi. The complainant is directed to get firstly transfer the connection in his name by furnishing the fresh security with the OP and get allot the new connection and account number in his own name and only then he is permitted to file the complaint within the stipulated period of limitation.
 10.             In view of our above discussion, the present complaint is not maintainable on behalf of complainant as he is not consumer of the OP and the complaint is hereby dismissed. The parties are bear their own costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.    

Announced: Member President,
Dated: 20.03.2024. District Consumer     Disputes
          Redressal Commission, Sirsa.



 
 
[ Padam Singh Thakur]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ Sukhdeep Kaur]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.