Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 435.
Instituted on : 21.09.2015.
Decided on : 04.08.2016.
Smt. Sunita W/o Sh. Yudhvir R/o VPO Azadgarh District Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (UHBVNL), Rohtak Sub-Division No.3, Rohtak through SDO.
- Satyanarayan, Lineman, UHNBVNL, Sub-Division No.3, Rohtak.
- Sombir Lineman, UHBVNL, Sub-Divison No.3, Rohtak.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.JOGINDER KUMAR JAKHAR, PRESIDENT.
MS. KOMAL KHANNA, MEMBER.
SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Pardeep Mittal Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Sanjay Lall, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
SH. JOGINDER KUMAR JAKHAR, PRESIDENT :
1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant with the averments that she is consumer of opposite party vide domestic meter connection No.AQV35570 having A/c No.U-3123 installed at above mentioned address since last more than10 years. It is averred that on 17.09.2015 the opposite party no.2 & 3 visited the house of the complainant and installed the meter of the complainant at a pole situated towards western side i.e. outside the house of the complainant after duly checked the same but the supply was not continued by the opposite parties and they were adamant to supply the electricity from the pole which is far away from the house of the complainant for which it requires numerous meter of costly electricity wire. The complainant requested the opposite party no.2 & 3 to provide the electricity supply from the nearest pole but any heed was not paid to her requests and the opposite parties issued letter bearing memo no.3303 dated 17.09.2015. It is averred that act of opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. As such it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to connect the electricity connection of the complainant from the pole situated towards western side of the house and continue the electricity supply in the same manner as was earlier and to pay Rs.2000/- per day pertaining to the charges of generator plus diesel w.e.f. 17.09.2015 till the date of restoration and also to pay compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed their written statement submitting therein that the complainant had made a statement before them Forum on 22.09.2015 that the electricity meter may be connected to his house from Point Z to point Z1 and then to point X and as such the wire had been installed at the site temporarily and this is the right route, as connection cannot be given straight from point Z to Point X as the people namely Samarjeet Singh and Rajbala had some dispute with the complainant. It is averred that the department has to see the convenience in giving connection and the complainant has no locus standi to instruct the department that the connection should be given in the manner suits to the complainant. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied. It is averred that complainant is not entitled to get any relief. It is prayed that the complaint of the complainant may kindly be dismissed with costs.
3. Both the parties led evidence in support of their case.
4. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, Ex.CW2/A, document Ex.C1 to Ex.C53 and closed his evidence. On the other hand, ld. counsel for the opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 and has closed his evidence.
5. We have heard ld. counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
6. In the present case the dispute in question is that the electricity connection of the complainant was not connected from the point as desired by the complainant. However during the pendency of complaint, ld. counsel for the complainant made a statement that he has no objection to provide the electricity connection by the opposite parties from any point and as per the statement dated 15.07.2016 given by ld. counsel for the opposite party, the connection was provided to the complainant on dated 22.09.2015.
7. After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that the electricity connection of the complainant has already been installed/restored by the opposite parties and the supply is continued. As such there is no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
8. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
29.07.2016.
................................................
Joginder Kumar Jakhar, President
..........................................
Komal Khanna, Member.
………………….
Ved Pal, Member.
