Haryana

Ambala

CC/262/2015

Mangat Ram - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVN.Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Puran Singh

30 Mar 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

                                                                                            Complaint Case No. :    262 of 2015

                                                                                            Date of Institution    :    14.09.2015

                                Date of Decision      :     30.03.2016

Mangat Ram son of Sh. Siri Ram, Resident of village Pilkhani Tehsil and District Ambala.

……Complainant.

Versus

Uttri Haryana Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. through SDO (Op) Sub Division, Babyal, District Amblala.

……Opposite Party

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act

CORAM:        SH. A.K. SARDANA, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.                       

Present:          Sh. Puran Singh, Adv.  counsel for complainant.

                        Sh. Sarvejeet Singh, Adv. counsel for Op.

ORDER.

                        Brief facts of the present complaint are that complainant dug a deep tubewell in his field and OP provided electricity connection vide account no.MP-3/168-S/load 15BHP and as per complainant, he paid all electricity bills in time.  It has been further alleged that in the month of July 2015, tubewell-bore of the complainant got broken and thus complainant had to excavate the electric motor of 15 H.P. from the said bore, so, he dug another bore near the earlier bore and  put an electric motor of 5HP in the said new bore  as well as another motor of 5HP in the earlier bore and started to consume electricity power upto the load of 10 HP only. OP’s Vigilance Cell raided the premises of complainant on 07.09.2015 and  verbally demanded a sum of Rs.20,000/- as penalty from the complainant because as per OP, the act of the complainant was illegal and against the agreement with the OP whereas as per complainant, he is entitled to consuming of electricity  load upto 15BHP and thus the demand of Rs.20000/- by the OP is illegal and against the agreement between the parties and prayed for acceptance of complaint as per prayer clause.

2.                     Notice was sent to the OP who appeared through counsel and tendered reply to the complaint alongwith reply to the application for interim relief annexing copy of FIR No.1185 dated 11.09.2015 registered u/s 135 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003 at P.S. (I&P), Ambala regarding theft of electricity and thus counsel for OP argued that in view of the latest law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.5466 of 2012 arising out of SLP (C) No.35906 of 2011 titled as U.P. Power Corporation Ltd.& Ors. Vs.Anis Ahmad, complaint qua theft of electricity is not maintainable before Consumer Fora and prayed for dismissal of the same with costs. 

                        On the other hand, counsel for complainant contended  that complainant abstracted supply from the electricity line of the OP Nigam within the parameter of sanctioned load which does not come within the purview of theft of electricity as envisaged in Section 135 of the  Indian Electricity Act, 2003 and thus the OP has lodged false FIR against the complainant and present complaint is well maintainable before the Consumer Fora. 

3.                      We have perused the documents placed on file viz.LL-1 Checking Report dated 07.09.2015, Memo’s No.1064 & 1065 dated 10.09.2015 qua assessment & compounding charges relating to theft of electricity to the tune of Rs.20,000/- and letter bearing memo No.1066 dated 10.09.2015 written by the OP to SHO PS (I&P) Ambala for lodging of FIR under section 135 read with Section 151 of Electricity Act, 2003 against the complainant and copy of FIR dated 11.09.2015 lodged at PS (I&P) Ambala against the complainant prior to institution of the present complaint.  We have also gone through the judgment delivered by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.5466 of 2012 arising out of SLP (C) No.35906 of 2011 titled as U.P. Power Corporation Ltd.& Ors. Vs.Anis Ahmad, whereby it has been specifically held in para No.46 of the judgment that “the acts of indulgence  in “unauthorized use of electricity” by a person as defined in clause (b) of the Explanation below Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 neither has any relationship with “unfair trade practice” or “deficiency in service” nor does it amounts to hazardous services by the licensee. Such acts of “unauthorized use of electricity” has nothing to do with charging price in excess of the price. Therefore, acts of person in indulging in ‘unauthorized use of electricity’ do not fall within the meaning of “complaint” as we have noticed above and, therefore, the “complaint” against assessment under Section 126  is not maintainable before the Consumer Forum. The Commission has already noticed that the offences referred to in Section 135 to 140 can be tried only by a Special Court constituted under Section 153 of the Electricity Act, 2003. In that view of the matter also the complaint against any action taken under Sections 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is not maintainable before the Consumer Forum”.

                        In view of the legal position enunciated above, we hold that the “complaint” against the assessment made by the assessing officer under Section 126 or against the offences committed under Section 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is not maintainable before the Consumer Forum rather the mater  in question is triable by the Special Court constituted under Section 153 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003 as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Anis Ahmad (supra).  Hence, the present complaint is dismissed being not maintainable with a liberty to the complainant to approach the appropriate Forum/Court and he would be entitled to the benefit of the provision of Section 14(2) of Limitation Act for the period during which proceedings  remained pending before this Forum.  Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

ANNOUNCED: 30.03.2016                                                               Sd

                                                                                                  (A.K. SARDANA)

                                 PRESIDENT                

 

                                                                                                           Sd/-

                               (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                                            MEMBER