BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM (UNDER CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986) SANGAREDDY, MEDAK DISTRICT.
Present: Sri P.V.Subrahmanayma, B.A.B.L., PRESIDENT
Smt U.Sunita, M.A., Lady Member
Sri Mekala Narsimha Reddy, M.A.,LL.B.,
P.G.D.C.P.L. Male Member
Tuesday, the 7th day of April, 2009
CC.No.45 of 2008
Between:
Medi Sheety Mallaiah S/o Kistaiah
Aged: 52 years, R/o 3-75, Thornala (V),
Siddipet Mandal, Medak District
… Complainant
And
1. Superindent Engineer,
Electrical APCPDCL, Sangareddy.
2. Divisional Engineer Electrical,
APCPDCL, Medak Road,
Opp: Govt Degree College,
Siddipet, Medak District.
3. Additional Divisional Engineer (Rural)
APCPDCL Medak Road,
Opp: Govt Degree College, Siddipet
4. Assistant Electrical Engineer (Rural),
APCPDCL Medak Road,
Govt. Degree Collect,
Siddipet, Medak District
5. Balya (Line men)
APCPDCL, Medak Road,
Opp: Govt Degree College,
Siddipet, Medak District.
6. Siddaiah Junior Linemen
APCPDCL Medak Road,
Opp: Govt Degree Collect,
Siddipet, Medak District.
….Opposite parties
This case has come up for final hearing before us on 26.03.2009 in the presence of the complainant in person, and Sri. B.A. Srinivas Reddy, advocate for opposite parties No. 1 to 6, upon perusing the record and having stood over for consideration till this day this forum delivered the following
-2-
O R D E R
(Per Sri. P.V. Subrahmanyam, President)
This complaint is filed Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to direct the opposite parties to re-connect electricity supply to his residential his house and to pay compensation.
The averments in the complaint in brief are as follows:
1). The complainant is a resident of House No. 3-75, Thornala Village, Siddipet Mandal, Medak District. In the year 2001 during Jannama Bhoomi Programme the complainant obtained a demand draft for fixing meter in his house to record electricity consumption and delivered the draft to the electricity officials. As meter was not fixed the complainant has been using electrical energy from S.C. No. 98. As the said meter also went to repairs, the complainant has been using electrical energy by tapping directly from the over headlines, for which, case was filed for theft of electrical energy and the complainant settled the matter by paying compounding fee. When the complainant insisted for meter, he was taken to the electricity office and informed that service connection number 601 was released in his name in the year 2001 it self and the complainant has to pay Rs.3,523/- towards arrears and if that amount is paid then only meter will be fixed. The complainant then ventilated his grievances to press people which was published in news papers. Within few days there after meter was fixed and the complainant was informed that there are arrears of Rs.3,523/- . There after in every bill the said amount is being shown as arrears. When the complainant questioned the electricity officials about the arrears in the bills they threatened him and directed to pay the arrears and then disconnected electricity supply. The complainant has been in darkness since then. Villagers are mocking at him due to which the complainant has been suffering from mental agony. The complainant therefore pray for justice and also direct the opposite parties to pay compensation for threatening him.
-3-
Counter of opposite parties 1 to 6 is filed to the following effect:
2). S.C. No. 98 in Siddipet was released to the house number 3-775 in which the complainant and his three brothers have been living. C.C. bills were not paid by them regularly, therefore it was disconnected for non payment of arrears. S.C. No 98 was kept under bill stop condition. During the year 2001 Jannam Bhoomi Programme was fixed in Thornala Village for providing meters to the needy villagers. The complainant’s brothers constructed a new house and started living there separately. The allegation that in the said Jannama Bhoomi Programme the complainant applied for a new meter on H.No. 3-75 in Thronala Village by paying required amount is not disputed. Service was also released to him on H.No. 3-75 bearing S.C. No. 601 Cat. I for domestic and the same was informed orally to him at that time. As the old service connection number 98 was under bill stop condition, located in the same premises on the same house of the same family new meter for S.C. No. 601 sanction to the complainant was not fixed and the same was informed to him and the complainant and his brothers were requested orally to pay the arrears of S.C. No. 98 to H.No. 3-75 and the staff was directed not to fix the meter to S.C. No. 601. For the said reasons the meter on H.No. 3-75 was not fixed by the department but the complainant and his brothers did not pay the arrears of C.C. bills amounting of Rs.3,523/- accrued owing to the non payment of the C.C. bills and had been using the electricity stealthily by means of hooking to L.T. line and there by were causing loss to the department. During surprise inspection conducted by DPE WING on 28.08.2006 in order to avoid theft of energy the inspecting staff noticed theft of energy by the complainant by tapping the power supply directly from the L.T. line applying hooking without the meter contrary to the terms and conditions of the supply of power to the service number 98 and a case was booked against the complainant on 28.08.2006 and imposed fine on him for illegal use of energy by way of theft. The complainant has compounded the offence by paying amount as stated in the complaint. The allegation that the departmental people informed the complainant about due of Rs.3,523/- to S.C. No. 601 and meter will not be fixed unless the said amount is paid is correct and is not denied. The contents in the news paper publication are false and denied. On seeing the news paper publication Divisional
-4-
Engineer directed Assistant Divisional Engineer to make personal enquiry and submit a detailed report in order to know truth or otherwise of the news item. The said Assistant Divisional Engineer submitted enquiry report. C.C. bill dt 07.11.2006 filed by the complainant containing demand of Rs.3,632/- showing arrears of Rs.3,573/- with current bill amount of Rs. 109/- for /2006 is correctly given. As the complainant delayed in payment of C.C. bill amounts regularly they were accumulated as arrears for S.C. No. 601. The consumer is bound to pay the consumption charges of power for the use which was supplied to his service connection. The department as rightly disconnected the service for non payment of arrears. Now power is not disconnected to the service. Power is supplied to him and he is using. The complainant was in darkness for two months has a result of his failure to pay arrears of C.C. bills. The claim of Rs.1,00,000/- from the opposite parties towards compensation for mental agony, suffering etc. is not reasonable and untenable there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The dispute raised by the complainant does not come within the purview of Consumer Protection Act. Disconnection was for non payment of arrears and for violation of the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003 and the Rules and for such disputes the provisions for Electricity Act are attracted but not Consumer Protection Act. The complaint may therefore be dismissed with costs.
3). Evidence affidavits of both sides filed. No documents are marked on either side. Written arguments are also not filed on either side. Oral arguments are also not advanced by both parties. Perused the record.
4). The point for consideration whether the complainant is entitled for order of reconnection of electricity supply to his house and for compensation as prayed for in the complaint?
Point:
5). The case of the complainant is that in the year 2001 he applied for electricity connection to his newly constructed house bearing No. 3-75 in the premises where the old house of his father was located, which was demolished, in Thronala Village, but till the year 2006 connection was not given to his house by fixing meter.
-5-
But on 13.10.2006 meter was fixed to his house and connection was given with S.C. No. 601 and the first consumption bill was received for Rs.3,623/- and when the complainant questioned, the departmental people of the opposite parties stated to him that in the year 2001 it self during Jannama Bhoomi Programme connection was sanctioned to his house and S.C. No. 601 was allotted but because S.C. No. 98 which was connected to the house of his father in the same premises was under bill stop condition for non payment of arrears, meter was not fixed to his house for the newly allotted S.C. No. 601. According to the complainant how could there be arrears for S.C. No. 601 from year 2001 to 2006 when there was no connection at all. The opposite parties admit not fixing of meter and not giving electricity connection to the house of the complainant with S.C. No. 601. According to them the complainant and his three brothers were living jointly but C.C. bills were not paid regularly for the previous S.C. No. 98, therefore it was disconnected and kept under bill stop condition, however in the year 2001 Jannama Bhoomi Programme, the complainant and his brothers constructed a new house by demolishing the old house and started living separately and the complainant applied for a new meter and the same was released with S.C. No. 601. According to the opposite parties the same was informed orally to him at that time. But the complainant has stated in his evidence affidavit that in the year 2006 when he went to electricity office, then he came to know about electricity connection with S.C. No.601 standing in his name and till then he did not know. There is no satisfactory evidence from the opposite parties to believe their version that they informed orally to the complainant in the year 2001 itself about releasing S.C. No. 601 to his house. The opposite parties have specifically admitted in their counter that meter was not fixed for S.C. No. 601. According to them the complainant and his brothers were requested orally to pay the arrears of S.C. No. 98 and the staff was directed not to fix meter to S.C. No. 601 till the payment of arrears. Therefore according to them meter was not fixed for S.C. No. 601 till the year 2006. Even for this oral request of the departmental people to the complainant and his brothers for payment of arrears to S.C. No. 98, there is no satisfactory evidence.
6). The contention of the opposite parties that all the years from 2001 to 2006 the complainant has been using electricity energy stealthily by committing theft by
-6-
way of tapping through hooking to L.T. line and there by caused loss to the department and hence the complainant has to pay the amounts shown in the bill as arrears. The complainant admitted theft of electrical energy but according to him the department has booked case against him for the same and fined and he paid Rs. 6000/- fine and compounded the offence and the same is admitted by the opposite parties. When the complainant has paid fine amount and estimated loss by paying compounding fee, the question of arrears for S.C. No. 601 which was not even connected to the house of the complainant does not arise. Therefore the defense taken by the opposite parties does not stand for reason and giving bill showing arrears for the period prior to the date of connection amounts to the deficiency in service.
7). The contention of the opposite parties that this dispute does not come within the purview of Consumer Protection Act cannot be accepted in the circumstance discussed the above.
8). In the counter it is stated that the claim of complainant for compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for mental agony, suffering etc. is not reasonable. The complainant has not at all asked for compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- in the complaint. What is asked in the complaint is that the complainant may be compensated for the threats to him by the departmental people of the opposite parties.
9). Because it is stated in the counter of the opposite parties that electricity connection is given to the S.C. No. 601 and because the complainant has not disputed the same, no order for reconnection need be passed. However for deficiency in service and for threats of disconnection and for causing mental agony to the complainant, the opposite parties are bound to pay compensation. The point is answered accordingly in favour of the complainant.
10). In the result the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties 1 to 6 to pay Rs.3,000/- as compensation and costs of this litigation. One month time is granted for payment. The liability of the opposite parties is joint and several. The demand for
-7-
payment of the alleged arrears of Rs.3523/- cannot sustain and hence need nor be paid by the complainant, as there are no such arrears.
Typed to dictation corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum this the 7th day of April, 2009.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER MALE MEMBER
APPENDEX OF EVIDENCE
For the Complainant: - For the Opposite parties:-
-Nil- -Nil-
DOCUMENTS MARKED
For the Complainant: - For the opposite parties :-
-Nil- - Nil-
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
Copy to:
1) The Complainant
2) The Opp.Parties
3) Spare copy copy delivered to the Complainant/
Opp.Parties On ___________
Dis.No. /2009, dt.
