District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.

Consumer Complaint  No. 421/2021.

 Date of Institution:24.08.2021.

Date of Order:27.03.2023.

Rukhsana aged about 49 years wife of Shri Aas Mohammad R/o Main road, Shyam Colony, Faridabad, Adhar No. 2384 0477 5808, Mobile No. 9716282878.

                                                          …….Complainant……..

                                                Versus

1.                The SDO, Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Sub Division, Tilpat Circle-1, Grater Faridabad.

2.                Executive Engineer, Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigamm Sector-15, near Gurudwara, Faridabad.

                                                                              …Opposite parties.

Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Now  amended  Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.

BEFORE:            Amit Arora……………..President

Mukesh Sharma…………Member.

Indira Bhadana………….Member.

PRESENT:                   Mohd. Nafees Khan  , counsel for the complainant.

                             Sh.  Rajiv Rana, , counsel for opposite parties Nos.1 & 2.

ORDER:  

                   The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant was

owner in possession of  House No.1., Shyam Colony Sehatpur, Faridabad in which the domestic electricity connection bearing its old account No. PL-17-0028 new account No. 0920070000 was installed by the opposite parties.  Since the date of installation of the said electricity connection the complainant had been regularly paying the electricity charges to the opposite parties from time to time.  But suddenly the opposite parties issued the impugned electricity  bill dated 04.04.2016 for the billing period of 27.12.2016 nto 04.04.2016 i.e. 99 days thereby the opposite parties shown consumed units 1238 for the total amount of Rs.1,16,742.97ps. including SOP charges Rs. 96,55635 Ps.   Thereafter the complainant visited to the office of the opposite parties and  requested the opposite parties to rectify/correct the impugned bill but the opposite parties did not rectify the said bill while the complainant was ready to deposit the electricity charges as per actual consumption charges.    Instead of rectification/correcting the impugned electricity bill dated 04.04.2016 for Rs.1,16,742.97 ps. Including SOP charges Rs.96,55635 ps. The opposite parties prepared the impugned LL-1 checking report No. 2893/30 dated 19.08.2017 and imposed penalty of Rs.48,033/-  upon the complainant.  However the complainant had already deposited the full and final amount of Rs.48,033/- with the opposite parties. In the month of March 2017 officials of the opposite parties had visited the hosuenof the complainant and they disconnected the electricity connection from the house of the complainant and removed the electricity connection from the house of the complainant forcibly and illegally.  Thereafter under the pressure of the opposite parties the complainant had deposited the entire penalty amount with the opposite parties.  The impugned electricity bill No. 092009840409 dated 04.04.2016 for the billing period of 27.12.2015 to 04.04.2016  i.e for 99 days showing consumed units 1238 for the total amount of Rs.1,16,742.97 ps. Including SOP charges Rs.96,556.35ps. and if

any other future electricity bill generated by the opposite parties was ex-facie, illegal, false, frivolous, imaginary wrong against the facts and the principle of natural justice and the complainant was not liable to pay the impugned bill amount Rs.1,16,742.97 ps. To the opposite parties and hence the same liable to be declared as null and void abinitio.   The complainant requested the opposite parties to rectify the impugned the impugned electricity bill  No. 0920009840409 so that the complainant could deposit the actual consumption charges as per the domestic use with the opposite parties but the opposite parties did not accept the legitimate request of the complainant. The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint.  The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:

a)                the impugned electricity bill No. 092009840409 dated 04.04.2016 for the billing period of 27.12.2016 to 04.04.2016 i.e 99 days as null and void thereby the opposite parties shown consumed unit 1238 for the total amount of Rs.1,16,742.96 ps, including SOP charges Rs.96,556.35ps. regarding electricity connection bearing is old account No. PL-17-0028 new account NO. 0920070000 pass an order to rectify the said bill and issue fresh and rectified electricity bill to the complainant.

b)                restore electricity connection bearing account No. 0920070000 at House NO.1 Main Road Shyam Colony, Sehatpur, Faridabad and continue the electricity supply to the complainant immediately.

iii)               restraining the opposite parties from recovering the impugned electricity bill amount Rs.1,16,742.97ps. from the complainant forcible illegally and in any coercive manner whatsoever may kindly be passed in favour of the complainant and against the opposite parties.

iv)               pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .

2.                Opposite parties put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite parties refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that  that there was a special Tribunal cum-Electricity Court had been designated/ empowered to deal with the theft energy cases as per the Electricity Act 2003.    The complaint does not fall within the definition of Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (Act) in any manner whatsoever. In fact, the complainant found involved in case of theft of energy, hence not fall within the definition of “Consumer” in any manner whatsoever  he did, under the Consumer Protection act. Opposite parties denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.                The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.

5.                In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties–DHBVNL with the prayer to: a)         the impugned electricity bill No. 092009840409 dated 04.04.2016 for the billing period of 27.12.2016 to 04.04.2016 i.e 99 days as null and void thereby the opposite parties shown consumed unit 1238 for the total amount of Rs.1,16,742.96 ps, including SOP charges Rs.96,556.35ps. regarding electricity connection bearing is old account No. PL-17-0028 new account NO. 0920070000 pass an order to rectify the said bill and issue fresh and rectified electricity bill to the complainant. b)   restore electricity connection bearing account No. 0920070000 at House NO.1 Main Road

Shyam Colony, Sehatpur, Faridabad and continue the electricity supply to the complainant immediately. iii)    restraining the opposite parties from recovering the impugned electricity bill amount Rs.1,16,742.97ps. from the complainant forcible illegally and in any coercive manner whatsoever may kindly be passed in favour of the complainant and against the opposite parties.  iv)pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .

                    To establish his case the complainant  has led in his evidence,  Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Rukhsan wife of Shri Aas Mohammad, Ex.C2 – notice u/s 160 Cr.P.C, Ex.C3 – Receipt, Ex/C4 – Adjaar card.

                   On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties strongly agitated and opposed.  As per the evidence of the opposite parties   Ex.RW1/A –affidavit of  Shri Brij Mohan, SDO (OP), Sub Division, Tilpat, Circle-1, Grater Faridabad, Ex.R-1 – Checking report, Ex.R-2 – Order to assessment by license for offence of theft u/s 135 of Electricity Act,2003, Ex.R-3 Notice to consumer by licensee for compounding the offence  of theft of electricity u/s 135 and Section-152 of Electricity Act, 2003.

6.                This complaint has been filed against the assessment made by the opposite parties under section 135 of the Electricity Act for commission of alleged theft of electricity by the complainant.  Such a complaint is not maintainable before the Consumer Commission in view of the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in civil appeal no. 5466 of 2012 entitled  “U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. & Others Vs. Anis Ahmad” decided on 01.07.2013.  So, this complaint is dismissed as not maintainable before the Consumer Commission.  However, the complainant

is at liberty to approach the competent authority/court for redressal of his grievance. File be consigned to the record room.  Copy of this order be given to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to record room.

Announced on:  27.03.2023.                                (Amit Arora)

                                                                                  President

                     District Consumer Disputes

           Redressal  Commission, Faridabad.

                                                           (Mukesh Sharma)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                Redressal Commission, Faridabad.

                                                              (Indira Bhadana)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                     Redressal Commission, Faridabad.