Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 495
Instituted on : 23.08.2021.
Decided on : 15.12.2022
Baljit Singh Bamal (age 65 years) son of Sh. Chattar Singh Bamal resident of H.No.665/12, Dev Colony, Rohtak (HR) Mob. No. 9215850777.
........................Complainant.
Versus
- UHBVNL, Rohtak through its Superintending Engineer, Power House, Delhi Road, Rohtak.
- The Executive Engineer (OP) Division UHBVNL Ltd. Rohtak Power House, Delhi Road, Rohtak.
- Sub-Divisional Officer, Operation Division No.1 UHBVNL, Rohtak, Power House, Delhi Road, Rohtak
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Complainant in person with Sh.D.S.Sehrawat, Advocate for
complainant.
Sh. Ashok Pasrija, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that he applied for new electric connection on 30.06.2021 and new connection 1D-R-41-621-570 was given and the same was intimated through message dated 03.07.2021. The Opposite parities send another message on 30.07.2021 and on 31.07.2021 to the complainant submitting therein that his application for new electric connection was rejected due to non-payment of bill pending regarding A/c No.5432360000. The opposite parities illegally demanded Rs.22,665/- for committing theft of electricity from the complainant and the same was challenged in the Hon'ble Court and order was passed by the Hon'ble Forum on 09.07.2010 and same complaint was dismissed by the Hon'ble Forum for lack of jurisdiction. The complainant paid all the current electricity charges to the opposite parties, up to 04.04.2015. The opposite parties after 04.04.2015 removed the meter regarding A/c No. 5432360000. The respondents/Opposite parties sent the another bill in July 2015 in which meter reading was shown Zero. The respondents rejected the application for new electricity connection No.1.D.R-41-621-570 due to non-payment of bill on 30.07.2021. The complainant approached the officials of opposite parties immediately and requested for installation of new electric connection for many times but finally on 17.08.2021, the opposite parities flatly denied to consider the genuine request of the complainant. There is clear deficiency in service on them part of opposite parties and opposite parties are liable to compensate the complainant. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to get install new electric connection to the complainant and in that eventually, if the new meter connection will not be provide to the complainant as required, in that condition to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties in their reply has submitted that complainant was involved in theft of energy and penalty and compounding charges were imposed upon him but he failed to pay the same and same are still pending against the complainant. The complainant filed a Consumer complaint which was dismissed vide order dated 4.3.2014. The said amount of penalty and compounding fee is still pending against the complainant. The complaint regarding sending of messages to the complainant for rejection of new electric connection due to non payment of pending bill is correct but it is denied that at this stage the demand for pending bill regarding a/c no.5432360000 is illegal, arbitrary and against the rules and law. New connection cannot be issued without payment of pending amount.. There is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and dismissal of complaint has been sought.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant in his evidence tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C6 and also tendered documents Ex.C7 to Ex.C10 in additional evidence and has closed his evidence on dated 02.03.2022. Ld. counsel for the opposite parties in their evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R5 and closed his evidence on dated 04.01.2022.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. In the present case, it is not disputed that the application of complainant for new connection was rejected by the opposite parties on the ground of non payment of bill, which is proved from the document Ex.C1. However, during the pendency of complaint, opposite parties have issued the connection to the complainant and a statement to this effect has been made by the complainant on dated 06.12.2022. Through this statement complainant has stated that opposite party has issued the domestic connection to the complainant and the case be decided according to the prayer clause. In this regard it is observed that complainant applied for new electric connection on 30.06.2021 but the same was rejected by the opposite parties on 31.07.2021 without any fault of the complainant, due to which the complainant had to file a complaint before this Commission and suffered harassment, which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. As such complainant is entitled for compensation.
6. In view of the fact and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.10000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant and to adjust the alleged awarded amount in the future bills of the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
15.12.2022.
……………………………......
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
..........................................
Vijender Singh, Member.
