Haryana

Yamunanagar

cc/593/2013

Raj Kumar s/o sh.Man Singh, - Complainant(s)

Versus

SDO UHBVNL, - Opp.Party(s)

Hari Krishan

20 Nov 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

 

                                                                                    Complaint No. 593 of 2013.

                                                                                    Date of institution: 19.8.2013

                                                                                    Date of decision: 20.11.2015

Raj Kumar aged about 40 years son of Sh. Man Singh, resident of village Fatehgarh Tumbi, Tehsil Bilaspur, District Yamuna Nagar.

                                                                                                       …Complainant.

 

                                    Versus

 

1. S.D.O. OP. Sub Division, UHBVN Sadhaura, District Yamuna Nagar.  
2. XEN, OP. Division, UHBVNL, Yamuna Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar 
3. Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. Sec-6, Shakti Bhawan, Panchkula, through its Chairman/M.D.  

                                                                                                   ..Opposite parties.  

 

BEFORE:       SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT,

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: None for complainant.

              Sh. Sanjay Sharma, Advocate, counsel for OPs.   

 

ORDER

 

1.                     Complainant Sh. Raj Kumar  has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 amended up to date praying therein that respondents (hereinafter referred as OPs) be directed to remove the electric line point B to C as shown in the site plan i.e. from the house of the complainant and one Surinder Singh and further to pay Rs. 40,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5500/- as litigation expenses.              

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint as alleged by the complainant are that the complainant is having an electricity connection at residential house bearing account No. 425 and paying the electricity bills regularly. As such there exist a relationship of consumer and supplier between the parties. The OPs are supplying the electricity to the Abadi of village through electric line and as per instructions of the OPs official of the OPs have to remove the electric poles from the house of Mohinder Singh son of Atma Ram and in removing the said poles the OPs have changed the direction of the electricity supply line and they have starched the electric line through the residential house of the complainant and the electric wires have been starched about 2 feet in height from the roof of the house of complainant and the complainant requested the OPs so many times to remove the said electric wire passing through the roof of the house of complainant but all in vain. It has been further mentioned that the complainant and his family members have to reach on the roof of the house and there is apprehension of danger to life and to the property of the complainant due to electricity wire which was passing through the roof of the complainant. When the OPs did not remove the electric wire from the roof of the complainant then complainant served a legal notice on 20.5.2013 to the OP No.1 but even after that OPs have not removed the electric wires/lines from the roof of the house of complainant and the complainant is running from pillar to post for Redressal of his grievance. Hence, this complaint.  

3.                     Upon notice, opposite parties appeared and filed their written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as complaint is not maintainable, no locus standi, no cause of action, no deficiency in service and complainant has concealed the true and material facts and on merit it has been submitted that the pole has been got removed at the demand of inhabitants of the village and the wire have been starched at the sufficient height as per instruction laid down by the Nigam from time to time. So the question of any request and refusal thereof does not arise at all. Further, it has been submitted that at the time of starching the wire, the complainant and others had raised no objections. The electricity line has been got installed as per inspected site plan. Thus, question of any request or refusal thereof does not arise at all. No such legal notice has ever been received by the Ops. The OPs did their work in the interest of general public to ensure smooth supply of electricity to their customers and no one can suggest the OPs towards their work as the work of the OPs has been supported by extremely expert engineers and there is no personal interest of any kind of the OPs.  As there is no deficiency in service or negligence on the part of OPs. Hence, the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed being false.

4.                     Both the parties failed to file any evidence despite availing many opportunities since 12.12.2013 when the case was fixe time fixed for evidence of both the parties and their evidence has been closed by court order today. However rough side plan has been filed as Annexure C-1 at the time of filing of complaint.

5.                     We have heard the learned counsel for the OPs and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file very carefully and minutely.

6.                     The only plea of the complainant is that an electricity wife is passing through the roof of the complainant at a height of 2 feet and there is an apprehension of danger to the life and the property of the complainant and despite so many requests but OPs failed to shift the electric wire from the roof of the complainant. In this way, there is a deficiency in service on the part of OPs whereas on the other hand, the version of the OPs is that the wire have been starched at the sufficient height as per instructions laid down by the Nigam from time to time and even their work has been done as per advise of extremely expert engineers and there is no deficiency or negligence on the part of OPs. The OPs have no personal interest of any kind and all the work has been done in the interest of general public and smooth supply of the electricity to their customers. Even the complainant does not fall under the definition of consumer.

7.                     After hearing counsel for the OPs and after going through the contents of the complaint, we are of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed as the complainant neither appeared nor filed any documentary evidence in support of his case. Even, the complainant failed to file any copy of complaint/application moved to the OPs for removing the electric wire from the roof of his house. It is a simple case of shifting of line, if any, and not for hiring any services. Further, the complainant has not filed any electricity bill in his name showing that he is a consumer of the OPs. Mere filing rough site plan with the complaint does not prove the case of the complainant. No affidavit of any neighbourer has been filed by the complainant.

8.                     In these circumstances, we are of the considered view that the complainant has miserably failed to prove his case that he has hired any services from the OPs or availed any services for consideration. Hence, the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed being devoid of any merit. 

9                      Resultantly, we find no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced: 20.11.2015.

                                                                                    (ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                    PRESIDENT

 

 

                                                                                    (S.C.SHARMA)

                                                                                    MEMBER