Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/392/2014

Manjeet Kaur W/o Kuldeep Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVN Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Harpal Singh

10 Jul 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

 

                                                                                    Complaint No. 392 of 2014

                                                                                    Date of institution: 11.09.2014

                                                                                    Date of decision: 10.07.2017

 

Manjeet Kaur, aged about 45 years, wife of Shri Kuldeep Singh, resident of # 350 Sector -1, Chandigarh Road Kharar, Punjab, presently r/o village Amadalpur, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.

 

 …Complainant.

 

                                             Versus

1. UHBVN Limited OP Sub Urban Division Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar through its SDO.
    
2. UHBVN Ltd. Yamuna Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar through its Executive Engineer.
3. UHBVN Limited, Sector 6, Shakti Bhawan Panchkula, through its Managing Director.
4. Shri Parveen Kumar (Contractor)  son of Shri Jaidir Shop No.19, Near Babli Sticker, Jagahdri Road, Yamuna Nagar.

 

                                                                                                … Respondents.

 

BEFORE:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG…………….. PRESIDENT.

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA………………………….MEMBER.

                        SMT. VEENA RANI SHEOKAND……………… MEMBER

 

 

Present:           Shri Harpal Singh, Advocate for complainant.

           Shri Jaipal Singh, Advocate for OPs.

 

 

ORDER (ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT)
 

 

1.                     The present complaint has been filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. 1986 against the respondents (hereinafter referred as OPs).

2.                     Brief facts, as alleged in the complaint, are that complainant had applied for tubewell connection vide application No.39464/AP dated 06.06.2013 and deposited security amount of Rs.1200/- vide book No.54647 receipt No.65. On the basis of said application, the tube well connection of the complainant was not likely to be released shortly and hence the complainant got converted the said application for tubewell connection under Self Execution Scheme and had deposited Rs.47,862/- as cost of Transformer vide Book No.084678, receipt No.126 dated 05.03.2014 and Rs.11340 on account of ACSR vide book No.084678 receipt No.126 dated 05.03.2014 and also deposited Rs.200/- vide Book No.084678, receipt No.127 dated 05.03.2014 and Rs.1707/- vide book No.084678 receipt No.124 dated 05.03.2014. After one week, the complainant contacted the OP No.4 and deposited the contract fee with the OP No.4 and thereafter the complainant repeatedly visited the offices of OPs No.1 to 3 but the OPs are prolonging the matter on one pretext or the other. AS per rules and regulations of the Nigam under the Self Execution Scheme, the electricity tubewell connection should be released within 15 days from the date of deposit of cost of transformer and other amounts of the Nigam but the Opposite parties have not released the connection of tubewell of the complainant till date due to which the complainant has been forced to prepare his fields for paddy crop with the help of generator by hiring the same @ 250/- per hour and which has caused a financial loss to the tune of Rs.50,000/-to the complainant. Complainant also visited to the contractor i.e. OP No.4 who stated that the material is not being supplied by the OP No.1 to 3 and he assured to erect the wire and poles and to install transformer as and when the same will be supplied by the OPs No.1 to 3 but the OPs No.1 to 3 are not supplying the material to the complainant in spite of depositing the cost of entire material. Lastly prayed for acceptance of the complaint and direct the OPs release the tubewell connection of the complainant at the earliest and further to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses.

3.                     Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed their written statement jointly taking some preliminary objection such as complaint of the complainant is not maintainable; complainant has no cause of action; complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint; complainant applied for tubewell connection with the OPs under the Self Financing Scheme and has deposited the requisite amount with the OPs is a matter of record. After deposit the amount by the complainant, the OPs completed all formalities and prepared the site plan and was ready to release the connection to the complainant, but some persons in whose land the line for release of the connection to the complainant was to be erected did not allow the OPs to do the same and threatened the Ops to bear the consequences for erecting the line and in this way the connection to the complainant was not released and the complainant was told the whole story for not releasing the connection to the complainant, so the connection could  not be released in time. The OPs will release the connection when the proper place is available with the Ops for erecting the line and on merit all the contents of the complaint were controverted and reiterated the stand taken in the preliminary objection and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.                     In support of his case, learned counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence her affidavit as Annexure CW/A, photocopy of receipts as Annexure C-1 to C-3 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

5.                     On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs tendered into evidence affidavit of Shri Pardeep Kumar, SDO UHBVNL, Sub Division Jagadhri as Annexure RW1/A and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.

6.                     We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on the file very carefully and minutely.

7.                     It is not disputed that complainant had deposited the requisite amount and completed all the formalities to release the electricity tubewell connection under the self finance scheme vide application No.39464/AP dated 06.06.2013. The only stand taken by the OPs is that they were ready to release the connection to the complainant but some persons in whose land the line for release of the connection to the complainant was to be erected did not allow the OPs to do the same and threatened the Ops to bear the consequences for erecting the line and in this way the connection to the complainant was not released. But this plea of the OPs is not tenable as no such documents have been placed by the official of the OPs on the case file that they ever moved an application to the police department or any higher authority complaining therein that some persons are creating nuisance in erecting the electricity tubewell connection of the complainant as neither any FIR or any DDR or any such copy of complaint has been placed on file by the OPs to prove that some persons did not allow to erect the electricity line. Further the OPs have also not placed on file any order passed by their office to erect the electricity line for releasing the tubewell connection of the complainant. In the absence of any cogent evidence we are of the considered view that OP No.1 to 3 has taken false and manipulated plea just to save the skin from liability which constitutes the deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part.

8.                     Resultantly, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OPs No.1 to 3 to release the tubewell connection of the complainant within a period of 30 days. Further, the OPs No.1 to 3 are also directed to pay interest @ 7% per annum on entire amount deposited by the complainant under the scheme of self execution, after a period of one month from the date of deposit till its realization. Further, the OPs No.1 to 3 are also directed to pay Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses. Order be complied within a period of 30 days after preparation of copy of this order failing which complainant shall be entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum as per law. Copies of this order be supplied to the parties concerned as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Pronounced in open court.

Dated: 10.07.2017                              

                                                                                    (ASHOK KUMAR GARG),       

                                                                                    PRESIDENT, DCDRF,

                                                                                    YAMUNA NAGAR AT JAGADHRI

 

 

                        (VEENA RANI SHEOKAND)           ( S.C. SHARMA)

                         MEMBER                                           MEMBER