District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No. 302/2021.
Date of Institution:01.07.2021.
Date of Order: 30.01.2023.
Shankar Lal s/o Ram Bhulle, R/o 51/15, Industrial Area, Faridabad.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. SDO (DHBVN), Sanjay colony, Sector-23, Faridabad.
2. S.E.(DHBVN), District Faridabad, Sector-23, Faridabad.
…Opposite parties……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana………….Member.
PRESENT: Sh. Chander Sain, counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Gopal Dutt Sharma, counsel for opposite parties Nos.1 & 2.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant was
a bonafide resident, of the portion of the building, of Kelson Industries, 51/15, Industrial Area, Faridabad, where the complainant was putting up, for the last 40 years. Portion of land had been given to the complainant, on the condition that complainant would pay, the cost of the land in installments. All the installments, had been regularly paid by the complainant and as such, the electricity, water and other facilities, which were being given to the complainant by the owner of Kelson Industry were to continue but the owner of the industry with malafide intention disconnected the supply of electricity illegally, without informing the complainant. After the completion of the payment of installment, of the total payment, the complainant requested, the legal conveyance deed may be executed in favour of him. As per the promise, but the owner of the factory refused to do so against which the complainant had been constrained to raise a stay matter before the Hon’ble Civil Judge, Faridabad. The complainant had rendered continuous service from 01.01.1981, as he had joined SS Kulsi Industries, the previous names of the present Kalson Industry and the name thereafter had been changed into Kalson Industry, with the address same as 51/15, Industrial Area, Faridabad. The present name of the industry was Kelson Industries with same management and same proprietors and the same venue. Termination of the service son 18.3.2019 of the complainant by the illegal order of the proprietor, which had compelled, the complaint to raise, his demand notice against the management which culminated into filing of the claim statement, directly before the Industrial Tribunal No.2, Faridabad claiming all the retrenchment benefits and reinstatement from the management of Kelson Industries. The raising of the demand notice and claim before the competent court of law, the owner/management became enraged and the supply of electricity had been disconnected 3 days earlier i.e. on 12.06.2021. On approaching the owner by the complainant, the owner accepted that the connection of supply had been disconnected and would remain disconnected till the pending cases i.e. of retrenchment benefits & others were not taken back, specially the case pending before the Presiding Officer of Industrial Tribunal-Cum-Labour Court NO.2, Faridabad was withdrawn. In the scorching heat, a human being and a prude person can never disconnect the supply without notice, but the owner of Kelson had taken the step so as to compel, the complainant to run away from the plot which he had purchased from the owner and had paid, the total amount of the plot in installments. When all the requests were turned down, then the complainant served, SDO, DHBVN, Sector-23 to grant a temporary connection on the terms and conditions of the electricity board, as the supply of the electricity to the complainant was highly needed because of the spread of Corona Pendamic and otherwise also the scorching heat would roast the family members. The complainant sent legal notice dated 12.06.2021 to the opposite parties but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to:
a) grant a temporary connection to the complainant, on the terms and conditions of the DHBVN Board which the complainant, was ready to fulfill and to follow in toto.
b) sum of Rs.1,25,000/- may be imposed as a penalty, upon the opposite parties for delaying to accept the request and installing connection and to agonies to the complainant and his family members, to shed the sweat in the scorching heat of the hot weather.
2. Opposite party put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that the complainant was not the consumer of DHBVN, since no connection of electricity was in the name of the complainant or his family. On applying the temporary connection by the complainant, complainant did not complete the condition for allotment of temporary connection as per Sales Circular NO. D-7/2020 (Clause 4.4.1) on completion of conditions as per Sales Circular No. D-7/2020 (Clause 4.4.1) the temporary connection would be released to the complainant, Reply of legal notice dated 14.06.2021 from complainant was given on 05.07.2021 as per memo NO. 850 and also given the reason as per Sales Circular No. D-7/2020 (Clause 4.4.1) for not giving the temporary connection . Opposite party denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party– DHBVN with the prayer to: a) grant a temporary connection to the complainant, on the terms and conditions of the DHBVN Board which the complainant, was ready to fulfill and to follow in toto. b) sum of Rs.1,25,000/- may be imposed as a penalty, upon the opposite parties for delaying to accept the request and installing connection and to agonies to the complainant and his family members, to shed the sweat in the scorching heat of the hot weather.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Shankar Lal, Ex.C-1 - legal notice,, Ex.C-2 – postal receipts, Mark-A – Identity card,, Mark B - Adhar card,, Marck C - Filling of the claim statement directly against the opposite party under section2A/2 of 1947 I.D. Act,
On the other hand counsel for the opposite party strongly agitated and
opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite party Ex.DW1/A – Shri O.K.Bhardwaj working as SDO (OP) No.3 Division, situated at Sector-23, Faridabad, Ex.D1/A - Sales Circular NO. D-7/2020 (Clause 4.4.1), Ex.D1/B – Sales Circular, Ex.D1/C – reply to legal notice dated 4.7.2021.
6. After going through the evidence led by the parties , the complainant is not the consumer of DHBVN, since no connection of electricity was in the name of the complainant or his family. Hence, the complainant is not a consumer as provided under Section 2(1) (d) (i) of the Consumer Protection Act.
7. Resultantly, the complaint is dismissed. Copy of this order be given to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 30.01.2023 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
