Punjab

Rupnagar

CC/18/7

Surinder Pal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sub Divisional ,officer, Punjab State Power Corporation ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Uma, Advocate

11 Jul 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTT. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ROPAR

                                 Consumer Complaint No. :  07 of 25.01.2018

                                 Date of decision                     :     11.07.2018

 

Surinder Pal aged about 45 years son of Sh. Gurdev Lal, resident of Village Daudpur Kalan, PO Bela, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar.  

                                                                 ......Complainant

                                             Versus

1. Sub Divisional Officer, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Sub Division, Bela

2. The Chairman, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, The Mall, Patiala

3. Amrinder Singh son of Sh. Paramjit Singh, resident of VPO Bela Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar.  

                                                                         ....Opposite Parties

                                   Complaint under Section 12 of the                                                       Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM

 

                        SH. KARNAIL SINGH AHHI, PRESIDENT

                        SMT. SHAVINDER KAUR, MEMBER

 

ARGUED BY

 

Sh. Surinder Pal, complainant in person along with his counsel Smt. Uma, Advocate, 

Sh. Sarvpreet Singh Baweja, Adv. counsel for O.Ps. No.1 & 2

Sh. Amar Raj Saini, Adv. counsel for O.P. No.3 

 

                                           ORDER

              SH. KARNAIL SINGH AHHI, PRESIDENT

 

1.         Complainant has filed the present complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties to restore the electricity connection bearing account No.R41BK21038181H of the shop of the complainant; to pay Rs.50,000/- as loss of work; to pay Rs.20,000/- as damages for harassment; along with Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.  

2.    Brief facts made out from the complaint are that complainant took the show room on rent from the father of the O.P. No.3 and is running the ladies saloon, gents saloon and boutique and cyber café in the said show room since long. He was earlier paying the rent to the father of the O.P. No.3 regularly and after the death of father of the O.P. No.3, he started to pay the rent to the O.P. No.3 and nothing is due towards him as rent of the shop of the O.P. No.3. Earlier the electricity connection bearing account No.R41BK21038181H was installed in the shop in question in the name of Paramjit Singh. The O.Ps. No.1 & 2 wrongly and illegally now issued the electricity bill dated 11.1.2018 for the sum of Rs.10,588/- which is deposited by the complainant. The O.P. No.3 in connivance with the O.Ps. No.1 & 2 is harassing and humiliating the complainant on one pretext or the other with the motive to eject the complainant from the shop in question for which he has no right to do so. The complainant has filed one civil suit in which the Hon'ble Court of Mrs. Jasbir Kaur, PCS Civil Judge, Sr. Divn, Rupnagar granted the status quo order dated 3.1.2018. It is further stated that due to the disconnection of the electricity connection, the complainant is suffering huge loss as his salon work is fully dependent upon the electricity. Hence, this complaint.       

 3.   On notice, O.Ps. No.1 & 2 appears through counsel and filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that the present complaint is not maintainable; that the complainant is not the consumer of the answering O.Ps.; that the complainant has not come before this Hon'ble Forum with clean hands; that the complainant has no locus standi to file the false complaint against the answering O.Ps; that the complainant has no cause of action against the answering O.Ps. On merits, it is stated that the deceased Paramjit Singh son of Dalip Singh resident of VPO Bela was the defaulter of answering O.Ps and as he was in arrears of Rs.10,566/- and his electricity connection was disconnected on 13.12.2017 vide PDCO Book No.59501 serial No.085 and thereafter the said amount was deposited but the said electricity connection was disconnected permanently and as per the rules and regulations once connection disconnected permanently it could not be restored and new application is to be given by the consumer for the installation of the new electricity connection and said Paramjit Singh was expired during this period and new electricity connection is to be applied by the owner of the property. Rest of the allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayer has been made dismissal thereof. 

4.         O.P. No.3 appears through his counsel and filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that the present complaint is not maintainable in the present form against the answering O.P.; that the complainant has not come in the court with clean hands. On merits, it is stated that the complainant had paid the rent up to 31.3.2017. After then the complainant has stopped to pay the rent. when the answering O.P. asked the complainant to pay the rent he refused to pay the rent and filed the suit for permanent injunction. As per the rent note dated 22.1.2013 the bill of the electricity was to be paid by the complainant. The answering O.P. has no concern with the other O.Ps. In fact when the answering O.P. demanded the rent the complainant filed the suit. The answering O.P. has nothing to do with the electric connection of the complainant. The reason of disconnecting of the electricity meter is between the complainant and other O.ps. Rest of the allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayer has been made dismissal thereof. 

5.    On being called upon to do so, the complainant has tendered his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CWA along with documents Ex.C1 & Ex.C6 and closed the evidence. The learned counsel for the O.Ps. No.1 & 2 has tendered sworn affidavit of Sh. Bawa Singh, SDO Ex.OP1/1 & copy of PDCO Ex.OP1/2 and closed the evidence. O.P. No.3 tender into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.OP3/1 along with documents Ex.OP3/2 & Ex.OP3/3 and closed the evidence. 

6.    We have heard the complainant and learned counsel for the O.Ps and have gone through the record of the file, carefully.

7.    Complainant counsel Smt. Uma, argued that Surinder Pal taken on rent one show room from father of O.P. No.3 where electric connection was already in existence. The complainant use to pay the consumption charges to O.P. No.3. With ulterior motive got issued the demand of electricity charges to the tune of Rs.10,588/- vide bill dated 11.1.2018. The complainant deposited the said amount and thereafter OP No.3 with the connivance of OP No.1 & 2 started harassing to get the show room vacated. Now the connection has been disconnected which amounts to deficiency in service. The complaint be allowed with costs with the directions to the O.Ps. No.1 & 2 to install the connection.

8.    Sh. Saravpreet Singh Baweja, counsel for O.Ps. No.1 & 2 argued that relation does not exist between the complainant and O.Ps. No.1 & 2 qua consumer. Directly neither O.Ps. No.1 & 2 issued any connection in the name of the complainant nor complainant deposited Rs.10,588/- with the O.Ps. No.1 & 2. So the complaint is not maintainable, hence the same be dismissed.

9.    Sh. Amar Raj Saini, counsel for O.P. No.3 argued that due to non deposit of necessary consumption charges the connection was disconnected and the arrears were deposited by the O.P. No.2, complainant filed one Civil Suit pending in the Civil Courts, Ropar, in which no relief granted. It is the option of the owner either to get the connection released or not. Lastly prayed to dismissed the complaint with costs.

10.   Complainant Surinder Pal has come forward with the averment that he is the consumer, the connection is in the name of father of OP No.3 namely Paramjit Singh and it was installed by the O.P. No.1 & 2 with the deposit of the necessary consumption charges and now disconnecting the showroom connection by the O.Ps. No.1 & 2 amounts to deficiency in service and prayed that relief be granted.

11.   The Forum after appreciating the documentary evidence, pleadings and the arguments advanced by both the parties has come to the conclusion that Ex.C2 is the photocopy of the bill and is in the name of Paramjit Singh and its deposit is also in the name of Paramjit Singh. Ex.C4 is notice to the complainant on behalf of O.P. No.3. Ex.C1 is the photocopy of the rent deed dated 22.1.2013. Ex.C6 is the order of Civil Court dated 3.1.2018. Beside this nothing on the file.

12.   OPs placed on file Ex.OP1/2 i.e. letter dated 13.12.2017 for the disconnection of connection and then placed on file affidavit of OP NO.3.    

13.   It is the primary duty of the complainant to firstly prove the relationship as consumer then to prove the deficiency in service. The connection as per the evidence on file was in existence in the name of Paramjit Singh, who is no more. O.P. No.3 is his son, O.Ps. No.1 & 2 demanded vide bill dated 11.1.2018 Rs.10,588/- that stands deposited in the name of Paramjit Singh. Complainant alleged his relation with the O.P. No.3 as tenant. Under the given circumstances, Forum is of the opinion that complainant remain unsuccessful in proving firstly the relationship then the deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. No.1 & 2. Moreso, this complaint is dated 25.1.2018 and connection was disconnected much prior to that as per the reply of O.Ps. No.1 & 2. So no ground is made out to grant the relief, the complaint is without merit.

14.   In the light of above discussion, the complaint stand dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own cost.

15.   The certified copies of this order be supplied to the parties forthwith, free of costs, as permissible under the rules and the file be indexed and consigned to Record Room.

 

                     ANNOUNCED                                                      (KARNAIL SINGH AHHI)

                     Dated .11.07.2018                            PRESIDENT
 

 

 

                                                         (SHAVINDER 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.