The record is taken up for order over the petition dated 03.06.2014 of the OPs, challenging the maintainability of the case. 

In order to discuss the said petition in proper perspective, it is essential to recapitulate the salient features of this case.

The complainant’s case in brief is that he had applied for installation of new electric connection at his house, and he deposited Rs.910/- on 27.12.2004 to obtain such connection.  However, despite lapse of over 9 years, he did not obtain the said connection despite several representations to the OP.  The complainant sent notices through his ld advocate to the OP No.2, but to no avail.  On 19.11.2013, two persons of OP No.1 came to his house to install electric connection without installing electric meter, and though the complainant was reluctant to obtain such connection, he allowed them to install electric connection to his house when they assured that the electric meter would be fixed within two or three days.  On 20.11.2013, Mr. Tamang of OP No.1 came to his house claiming to be Station Manager of OP No.1, and asked the complainant to sign some papers purportedly for supply of electric meter.  Thereupon, Mr. Tamang removed the electric bulb, and electric wire from the complainant’s house, and threatened that he would lodge FIR against the complainant for illegal electrification.  Later, the complainant received provisional assessment bill of Rs.3,108/- dated 22.11.2013 issued by the OP No.1 even though meter and electric connection had not been provided to his house.  The complainant protested about the matter, and sent ld lawyer’s notice to OP No.3 on the said subject.  When the complainant protested about the matter with OP No.1, the said OP No.1 suggested that he should file an application for reducing the provisional bill.  However the complainant did not file any such application for reduction of the bill, since he was not in default.  The OP No.1 had sent a letter to the complainant asking him to attend hearing for final assessment bill on 11.12.2013, but the complainant could not do so, since his father died, and he was busy with the funeral rites.  The OP No.1 informed him later that the aforesaid assessment bill had been converted into final assessment bill of Rs.3,810/-. 

The complainant claims that he and his family members have suffered much due to non-electrification of their house, and he filed this case praying for compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for the mental agony, and financial loss which he suffered, and he prays for some other reliefs as well.

In the petition dated 03.06.2014 the OPs claim that this case is not maintainable, since it involves the question of theft of electricity, and such cases

Contd...P/2

-:2:-

are not maintainable in the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. 

In the said petition the OPs claim that the Station Manager/AE, Bagdogra (CCC) inspected the premises of the complainant on 20.11.2013, along with some others, and he found that the complainant was utilizing electricity in an unauthorized way by means of hooking, and he seized the incriminating articles by drawing up seizure list, wherein the complainant signed.  On that occasion the complainant was unable to submit necessary test certificate which was necessary for obtaining new service connection. 

The OP served provisional assessed bill to the complainant, and when the complainant submitted a prayer dated 29.11.2013 regarding the provisional assessment bill dated 22.11.2013, the complainant was informed to appear before the Station Manager at 1 p.m. on 11.12.2013, but as he did not comply, the provisional assessed bill was converted into final assessed bill as per provisions of The Electricity Act, and the matter was duly communicated to the complainant on 16.12.2013.  The OPs acknowledge that the complainant had submitted application for obtaining supply of electricity to his premises, and he deposited the quotation amount and the application fee, and labour charge, and security deposit, but he did not complete other formalities like execution of agreement, and submission of test report, and thus he could not be given service connection. 

The OPs have filed written objection/written version dated 02.07.2014, wherein they challenge the maintainability of the case on the ground that it involves allegation of theft of energy, which is not within the jurisdiction of the Forum.  In the said written objection/written version the OPs make out the same ground as in their petition dated 03.06.2014 challenging the maintainability of the case. 

The complainant has filed written objections dated 02.07.2014 and 21.07.2014 against the petition dated 03.06.2014 of the OPs.  In the said written objections, the complainant claims that the case relates to inaction on the part of the OPs in not providing supply of electricity to him, and allegation of theft and proof of theft are two different things.  The complainant claims that the case relating to theft of energy is supposed to be pending before the Special Court, though he has not received any notice of the same.  He claims that this Forum has ample jurisdiction to entertain this case, and accordingly he prays for dismissal of the OPs’ petition dated 03.06.2014.

It is seen that though the complainant has filed copies of receipts showing that he paid the necessary charges towards application fee, security deposit, and

Contd...P/3

-:3:-

Labour HSC, yet it is the specific case of the OPs that the complainant did not complete other formalities like execution of agreement and submission of test report, and thus service connection could not be extended to him. 

The complainant has been unable to show that he executed the required agreement with the OPs for obtaining service connection, even though some other villagers of his locality have completed the formalities. 

Ld advocate of the OPs has produced copy of a letter dated 12.11.2013 through which the complainant was informed that after depositing the quotation amount, he had not completed the agreement formalities, and accordingly it was not possible to electrify his premises, and in the said letter the complainant was asked to complete the agreement. 

However, as already maintained, he did not do so. 

The OPs maintain that the Station Manager and some others inspected the premises of the complainant on 20.11.2013, and observed that the complainant was utilizing electricity in an unauthorized manner by means of hooking, whereupon the incriminating articles were seized, and the complainant signed the seizure list, and later FIR was lodged at Phansidewa Police Station.  On that occasion the complainant was unable to submit necessary test certificate, which was essential to obtain new service connection.

Ld advocate of the OPs has produced copies of the seizure list and the inspection report dated 20.11.2013, which bear the signatures of the complainant, and he has also produced a copy of the FIR lodged at Phansidewa Police Station, regarding theft of electricity by the complainant by means of hooking.

Ld advocate of the OPs has produced copy of a letter dated 17.01.2014 written by the OPs to the complainant, wherein it was mentioned to the effect that in Money Suit No.79/2003, which was filed by Smt. Sumati Das (wife of the complainant), the said Smt. Sumati Das had stated on oath before the Ld Civil Judge, Senior Division, Siliguri, during her cross examination that “there is electric connection in my house”, which clearly shows that the complainant was enjoying electricity at his house by illegal means.

The said letter further mentions that Money Suit No.79/2003, which was filed by Smt. Sumati Das against the OPs for the electrocution injury of master Tapan Das (son of the complainant) was dismissed by the Ld. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Siliguri, with the observation that there was no negligence on the part of the OPs.

Admittedly, the complainant had obtained provisional assessment bill of

Contd...P/4

-:4:-

Rs.3,108/- dated 22.11.2013, issued by the OPs, and when the complainant sent letter dated 29.11.2013 protesting against the said provisional assessment bill dated 22.11.2013, the OPs sent him letter dated 05.12.2013 asking him to attend hearing on 11.12.2013 for final assessment bill, but as the complainant did not appear on that occasion, the provisional assessment bill was converted to final assessment bill as per provisions of The Indian Electricity Act.      

Ld advocate of the OPs has cited the ruling of the Hon’ble National Commission, that the Consumer Forums have no jurisdiction to go into the issues of theft of electricity by the electricity consumers.  [2011 CTJ 649 (CP) (NCDRC)].

He has also invoked the ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, that a dispute wherein the question was unauthorized use of electricity, and assessment was made, after notice of provisional assessment and hearing to the consumer, then such a dispute did not amount to a consumer dispute. 

In the said ruling, the Hon’ble Supreme Court further observed that a complaint made against assessment of unauthorized use of electricity was not maintainable before the Consumer Forum.[(2013) AIR SCW 4342].

From the foregoing discussion, it is clear that the moot point in this case, is the alleged theft of electricity by the complainant, and accordingly the case is not maintainable in this Forum. 

The petition dated 03.06.2014 of the OPs is accordingly allowed, and the case is dismissed being not maintainable. 

No order as to cost.

Copies of the order be given to the parties free of cost.