Per Smt T. Suneetha, Member:-

The complainant filed this complaint u/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act seeking directions on the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and costs.

2.   In brief the averments of the complaint are hereunder:

The complainant is residing with his parents in the upstairs of two storeyed building of his own.  The complainant’s son Mr.K.Srinath Reddy is doing cultivation and keeping the produces such as paddy, pulses, maize, fertilizers and pesticides in the downward portion.  The service connections numbers of the both upstair and ground floor portions are 1211410000978 and 1211410001569 respectively. 

3.     The opposite parties issued a notice on 10-08-2010 in the name of K.Srinath Reddy on allegation that the house with service connection NO. 1211410001569 is being used for godown which is commercial purpose.  The dispute is pending between the son of the complainant and the opposite parties. 

4.     While so, during the temporary absence of the complainant on 24-02-12 some persons purporting to be officials of opposite parties department, high handedly disconnected the power supply to the house of the complainant without assigning any reasons. 

5.     Similarly in August, 2010 the opposite parties disconnected the service connection of the complainant and after one week after receiving reply notice from the complainant’s son restored the connection. 

6.     The complainant paid the bills regularly.  The complainant personally met the opposite parties and explained the situation but they put deaf year. 

7.     Due to attitude and behavior of the opposite parties, the complainant suffered a lot mentally and financially and which clearly falls under the deficiency of service under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act.  Hence, the opposite parties are liable to compensate the complainant towards damages and mental agony.  Hence the complaint. 

8.      The following is the version of  2^nd opposite party in brief :

        It is further submitted that the opposite parties never disconnected the service connection bearing no.1211410000978 at any point of time much specifically on 24-02-2012 as alleged by the complainant.  Therefore as the opposite parties never disconnected the service connection the question of restoration of power supply does not arise at all. 

9.     The service connection No. 1211410001569 issued in the name of K.Srinadha Reddy under Cat-I was disconnected when it was inspected by Assistant Divisional Engineer, Operation, Rural – 2, APSPDCL, Tenali, on 31-03-2010 at 14.10 hours for using it for godown purpose which is non-domestic.  There is neither negligence nor deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.  And it is liable to be dismissed. 

10.   The complainant and the opposite parties filed their respective affidavits.  Opposite parties 1,3 and 4 filed adoption memo in respect of all the proceedings taken up by 2^nd opposite party.  Exbs.A-1 to A-9 were marked on behalf of the complainant and Exbs.B-1 to B-4 were marked on behalf of the opposite parties.

11.    Now the points that arose for consideration in this

         complaint are:      

1. Whether the opposite parties committed deficiency of service?
2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to?

12.    POINT NO.1  :  The complainant’s allegation is that some people purporting to be the officials of opposite parties have high handedly, disconnected the power supply to the complainant’s service connection No. 1211410000978 on 24-02-12 in his temporary absence. 

13.    The opposite parties contention was that they disconnected the power supply to the complainant’s son Mr.Sridhar Reddy service bearing no. 1211410001569 (Cat-I domestic) for using the supply for godown purpose i.e., commercial purpose, but had never disconnected the Service connection of the complainant. 

14.   The complainant filed two 3^rd party affidavits in support of his allegation i.e., Mr.Movva Sambi Reddy, Sarpanch of Modukuru Village, Guntur district and another is Mr.Gade Gopala Reddy.  (signed as Venu Gopala Reddy)   resident of Modukuru. The complainant ought to have filed  the affidavit of his family members present at the time of alleged disconnection.  Under these circumstances affidavit of the complainant is not of much significance. The third party affidavits are ambiguous in whose house the alleged disconnection took place.  In the absence of the affidavit of complainant’s family members, the third party affidavits filed by the complainant in our considered opinion is of no assistance. 

15.   Ex.B-1 inspection notes, Ex.B-2 provisional Assessment Order and Ex.B-3 Final Assessment Order related to service connection no. 1211410001569 and as such they do not help in deciding the case.

16.   Under these circumstances, the Forum comes to a considered opinion that the opposite parties have not committed deficiency in service.  Therefore they are not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant.

17.   In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs. 

Typed to my dictation by Junior Stenographer, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the, 20^th day of June, 2012.

MEMBER                                  MEMBER                                  PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For opposite party: 

PRESIDENT