BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BAGALKOT.

C.C.No.122/2017

Date of filing: 08/12/2017

  Date of disposal: 06/02/2019

P R E S E N T :-

- V/S -

JUDGEMENT

By Smt. Sharada. K. President.

1.      This is a Complaint filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein after referred to as Act) against the Opposite Parties (in short the “OPs”) directed the OPs to reconnect the domestic electricity connection to the complainant house and quash notice dtd: 01.12.2017 issued by Ops and pay Rs.90,000/- towards mental agony, harassment and pay Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the proceedings and any other reliefs.

2.      The facts of the case in brief are that;

          The complainant is the resident of Bachinagudd, Tq: Badami, Dist.Bagalkot and he has taken domestic electricity connection to his house from Ops and Ops have issued R.R.No.BCDL55944 to the complainant and he had paid monthly used electricity charges to the Ops and further on dtd:01.12.2017 the complainant has paid electricity bill of Rs.400/- to the Ops. But, on dtd:25.11.2017 the Ops have disconnected complainant domestic electricity connection without issuing any notice and after enquiry by the complainant, the Ops have issued notice on dtd:01.12.2017 vide letter No.CDL/AEE/ AAO/SA/17-18/4353-54 and stated that, as per the case No.190/2009 dtd:25.03.2009 related to the meter No.BCDP/51713 and BCDP/28405 there is a balance of Rs.1,01,760/- which the complainant has to pay within 15 days from the date of receipt of this notice.

          It is further contended that, after receiving the notice, the complainant has shock and he has paid electricity bills regularly to the Ops till today and no balance due to the Ops and after detail enquiry, the Ops told him that, there is a balance of Rs.1,01,760/- related to the meter No.BCDP/51713 and BCDP/28405 of his floor mill and on dtd:25.03.2009 the Vigilance of Ops have filed the Criminal Case No.114/2009 for the theft of electricity U/Sec. 130 of 2003 before the Hon’ble District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot against the present complainant and on dtd:01.06.2010 the Hon’ble Court acquitted the present complainant and also the OP has not appeal the said judgement before appellant court and after laps of 7 to 8 years related to said case, now the OP disconnected domestic house electricity connection, which is even no related to the said case. Therefore, the acts of Ops are totally illegal and against the law. 

          It is further contended that, the complainant has produce the Xerox copy of the judgment in Special Case No.114/2009 and in the said judgement issues that, “Whether prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that, on 25.02.2009 between 12.00 noon and 12.30 P.M. the complainant with his staff inspected the floor mill of the accused in Bachinagudd village within the limits of complainant police station and noticed that, the accused had drawn electricity illegally from L.T. Pole by making use of service wire and bypassing the electricity meter was using electricity to run his floor mill and had made the electricity meter not to register the consumption and thus has committed theft of electricity which was punishable U/Sec.135 Electricity Act  2003” and with details reasoning’s on the said issues the Hon’ble District and Sessions, Bagalkot acquitted the present complainant. 

          It is further contended that, once a court acquitted, it means that, the present complainant has not theft any electricity of Ops and also the balance shown by the Ops is related to different meter Nos and OP has disconnected the complainant house electricity connection is abuse of law,  which is not related to the theft case and if at all there is any balance, then the Ops have to file case before proper court and finally the complainant has not issued any legal notice to the Ops, because if notice issued then again filing of this complaint take more than 22 to 25 days. Therefore, these attitude and acts of the Ops, the complainant and his family have to live in darkness of night without electricity light, it clearly shows that, there is negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the Ops. Hence, the complainant is constrained to file this complaint.

3.      The complainant filed this complaint along with IA seeking an interim order that, the OPs reconnect the electricity connection of complainant house meter R.R.No.BCDL55944 till to the disposal of main complaint and the same has been allowed at the stage of hearing itself by this Forum on dtd: 22.03.2018 that, the Ops are directed to reconnect the electricity power to house of complainant for a period of 3 months from today and the Ops are liberty to charges as per law by allowing the I.A.-I.

4.      After receipt of said notice to the Opponents, the OPs have appeared through their Counsel and filed their written version and contended that, the complaint is not tenable in law as well as facts of the case and contents of complaint is specifically denied by this OP’s and further contended that, the complainant has obtained an electric connection in the name of his deceased father by name Hanamappa Bhemappa Hanapur who died on 19.12.2005 and complainant has entered into agreement and he has forged the signature of his father in the agreement and also affixed the photo of his deceased father and obtained the present electricity connection BCDL55944 on dtd: 22.06.2015 and further the complainant has forged the signature of his deceased father in the Bond, Agreement, Wiring Diagram, Electricity Requisition Form and Electricity Connection Certificate. The said act constitutes Misrepresentation, Fraud, Forgery and Cheating by the present complainant.

          It is further contended that, when the Ops came to know about the said fact, they issued a notice to the complainant on dtd: 23.10.2017 and the same is rejected by the complainant and meanwhile the said notice was served by obtaining signatures of panchas of the neighboring people and thereafter, the connection was disconnected on dtd: 25.11.2017 by the Ops. Hence, there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OPs and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.         

5.      The complainant has filed his chief affidavit along with 11 documents to support of his case, which are as follows;

On the other hand OP.No.1 has filed affidavit including OP.No.2 & 3 on behalf of this case. The OPs have produced 5 documents which are as follows;

6.      On the basis of above said pleading, oral and documentary evidence, the following points arises for adjudications are as follows:  

Our Answer to the above points are:-

Point No.1 – Negative.

Point No.2 - Partly Affirmative

Point No.3 - As per the final order for the following:

R E A S O N S

7.  POINT NO.1 & 2:  The complainant has filed this complaint against the OPs for re-correction of domestic electricity connection and quash the notice dated: 01.12.2017 issued by the Ops, in the said contention, the Ops have filed objection and raised the contention that, the Section Officer Badami, is having all the documents related to this case and further the complainant has implead the OP No.4 i.e. Section Officer of Badami as the party to the proceedings and further contended that, the complainant has obtain the electric connection in the name of his deceased father by name Hanumappa Bheemappa Hanapur, who died on 19.12.2005 and complainant forged the signature of his father and he obtained the electricity connection by Misrepresentation, Fraud, Forgery and Cheating by the present complainant and further on dtd: 23.10.2017 the OP came to know about the said fact, the OP issued the notice to the complainant, but Complainant has rejected to receive the notice. Meanwhile, the neighbour people made as a witness and disconnected the electricity connection of the present complainant on dtd:25.11.2017 and case has been lodged against the complainant in a concern Police station for fraud and misrepresentation.

          On going through the records on file, the Complainant is not a Consumer in this juncture, since the records placed before us  bears the name of deceased Hanumappa Bheemappa Hanapur, it is clear that, the said Hanumappa had died on 19.12.2005, but the Complainant had forged the signature of his father in the documents instead of his signature and it is also clear that, the notice had been issued to the complainant regarding this and even Ops are taking steps against the complainant by lodging a FIR against this complainant. Hence, we cannot quash the notice issued by the Ops, anyhow as per the direction of this Forum, the Ops are liable to give electricity connection to the complainant as per the order made on IA, further Ops are at liberty to take necessary charges for re-connection in the name of the complainant, because we cannot curtail the rights of a citizen of our country. Moreover, the criminal case has been lodged against the complainant, we cannot keep our nose in a criminal proceedings which has been pending before the Criminal Court. Hence we answer Point No.1 in the Negative, Point No.2 is partly affirmative.

9.     POINT NO. 3:    In view of our findings to Point No.1 & 2 we proceed to pass the following;

//O R D E R//

1. The OPs are directed to provide electricity connection to the complainant as per the procedure and collect the due amount and connection charges to the Complainant.

2. Further OPs are directed to provide electricity connection to the Complainant within one month from date of this order.

3. Parties have to bear their own costs.

4. Send the copies of this order to the parties free of costs.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Forum on this 6^th day of 02 2019).