ORAL ORDER

Per Hon’ble Mr.S.R.Khanzode, Presiding Judicial Member

This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 31/01/2012 passed in consumer complaint no.225/2011, Mr.Salim Fakir Mahammad Madari v/s. Superintending Engineer, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co.Ltd. and another; by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nasik. It is a case of alleged deficiency in service on the part of respondents/opponents for not giving the energy connection though it was sanctioned.  It is the case of Electric supply company of which respondent/opponent represents as their employee with them went to the place of the appellant/complainant to give energy connection.  They were obstructed by the owner as per the civil dispute between the said person and the complainant. Company thereafter with the aid of police tried to give energy connection but in vain.  Thereafter a civil dispute was filed by the complainant himself in the Nasik Civil Court against the obstructionist.  Under the circumstances, it is further submitted on behalf of the opponent that no deficiency in service on their part could be alleged.  Forum accepted their contention and dismissed the consumer complaint.  Feeling aggrieved thereby, original complainant preferred this appeal.

At the time of hearing of appeal, appellant/original complainant and its counsel preferred to remain absent. We heard  Mr.S.S.Jinsiwale-Advocate for the respondent.

In view of the circumstances stated above to which there is no counter or any contradictory facts are stated, we find that since the Electric supply company tried to do everything which was possible for them to give energy connection which was sanctioned for the complainant, but they failed to do so not on account of their deficiency in service but since they were obstructed by Landlord who had dispute with the complainant.

Further, deficiency in service if at all could be alleged then that should be against Electric Supply Company and not against one of its employees viz. District Superintendent Engineer and Junior Executive Engineer, who are described as opponents.  For all these reasons, we find no reason to take a different view than what has been taken by the forum. Appeal is devoid of any substance. Holding accordingly we pass the following order:-

ORDER

Appeal stands dismissed.

In the given circumstances both the parties to bear their own costs.

Pronounced on 29^th August, 2012.