Haryana

Kurukshetra

CC/39/2021

Dr Tara Chand Prashar - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

Ashutosh Gupta

26 Apr 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KURUKSHETRA

 

                                                Complaint No.: 39 of 2021.

                                                          Date of institution:27.01.2021.

                                                          Date of decision: 26.04.2024

 

1. Dr.Tara Chand Prashar, aged about 42 years, resident of Village Amin, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra, Haryana.

 

                                                                                …Complainant.

                                                Versus

 

1. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Subdivision Amin through its SDO.

 

...Opposite party.

 

 

CORAM:     DR. NEELIMA SHANGLA, PRESIDENT.    

                   NEELAM, MEMBER.    

                   RAMESH KUMAR, MEMBER.

 

Present:     Shri Ashutosh Gupta, Advocate for complainant.

                Shri Sanjay Azad, Advocate for the opposite party.

ORDER:

 

1.             Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act.

2.             Briefly stated, it is the case of the complainant that on 07.07.2018, the electric meter of the complainant had damaged by fire and complainant informed the said incident on the office of the OP.   The officials of the OP visited his premises and look into the said meter and told him that the meter has damaged and they advised him to apply for a fresh electricity meter by fulfilling the due procedural formalities in order to restore his electricity supply. On the advice of the OP, the complainant applied for a new meter and paid requisite fees of Rs.1000/- and outstanding amount of Rs.6280/-. It has been further alleged by                   as per Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003, it is the mandatory duty of the OP for installing the new meter within 30 days, however, the OP failed to do so. The complainant requested the OPs several times by visiting their office to install the new meter by restoring the electric supply, but, all the aforesaid repeated requests made by the complainant to the OP turned on to deaf ears on the part of the OP. After awaiting a long period,  the OP finally in the month of February, 2019 installed the new electric meter in response to RTI/applications filed by the complainant Annexure C-1 and Annexure C-2.  

3.             On receipt of notice of complaint, OPs appeared and filed written statement, raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability; locus-standi; jurisdiction contended specifically by pleading  inter-alia that the meter of the complainant was burnt on 08.07.2018 and the legal formalities were completed during the period of February 2019 and after completion of the process of the Nigam by the complainant, the electricity connection had been restored to the complainant in February 2019. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.             In order to support his case, complainant tendered his affidavit Ex.CW1/A in his evidence. On the other hand, Learned counsel for the OPs tendered documents Ex. R-1 to R-6 in their evidence. .

5.             We have learned counsel for the parties and gone through the case file carefully.

6.             Shri Ashutosh Gupta, learned counsel for the complainant argued that on 07.07.2018, the electric meter of the complainant had damaged by fire and complainant informed the said incident on the office of the OP.   The officials of the OP visited his premises and look into the said meter and told him that the meter has damaged and they advised him to apply for a fresh electricity meter by fulfilling the due procedural formalities in order to restore his electricity supply. On the advice of the OP, the complainant applied for a new meter and paid requisite fees of Rs.1000/- and outstanding amount of Rs.6280/-. It is worthwhile to mention here that the OPs were lawfully required to restore the electricity supply by installing the electric meter within 30 days as per section 43 of the Electricity Act,2003. For the perusal of this Hon’ble Forum, Section 43 of the Electricity Act is reproduced hereinunder:

7.             (1) 1[Save as otherwise provided in this Act, every distribution] licensee, shall, on an application by the owner or occupier of any premises, give supply of electricity to such premises, within one month after receipt of the application requiring such supply:

Provided that where such supply requires extension of distribution mains, or commissioning of new sub-stations, the distribution licensee shall supply the electricity to such premises immediately after such extension or commissioning or within such period as may be specified by the Appropriate Commission.

Provided further that in case of a village or hamlet or area wherein no provision for supply of electricity exists, the Appropriate Commission may extend the said period as it may consider necessary for electrification of such village or hamlet or area. 1[Explanation- For the purpose of this sub-section, “application” means the application complete in all respects in the appropriate form, as required by the distribution licensee, along with documents showing payment of necessary charges and other compliances.]

(2) It shall be the duty of every distribution licensee to provide, if required, electric plant or electric line for giving electric supply to the premises specified in sub-section(1):

Provided that no person shall be entitled to demand, orto continue to receive, from a licensee a supply of electricity for any premises having a separate supply unless he has agreed with the licensee to pay to him such price as determined by the Appropriate Commission.

(3) If a distribution licensee fails to supply the electricity within the period specified in sub-section(1), he shall be liable to a penalty which may extend to one thousand rupees for each day of default.”

8.             The complainant requested the OPs several times by visiting their office to install the new meter by restoring the electric supply, but, all the aforesaid repeated requests made by the complainant to the OP turned on to deaf ears on the part of the OP. After awaiting a long period, the OP finally in the month of February, 2019, the opposite party installed the new electric meter in response to RTI/applications filed by the complainant Annexure C-1 and Annexure C-2.  

9.             Shri  Sanjay Azad, counsel for the OP has argued that the meter of the complainant had burnt on 08.07.2018 and after completing the process of the Nigam, just after the said connection had been restored by the OP. The OP further contended that there is no delay on the part of opposite party and therefore, they prayed for dismissal of the complaint with heavy costs. It has been further argued by the OPs that all the legal formalities were completed at the time of restoration of the connection and there was no delay on the part of the opposite party. We have perused the oral evidence as well as documentary evidence which are Ex.CW1/A. It is admitted fact that there was 6 months delay for restoration of connection to the complainant Tara Chand. As per section 43(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003, there is a legal provision for imposition of penalty upon the respondent Nigam at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per day for delay in release of electricity connection under Section 43(3) of Electricity  Act, 2003. Hence, for a delay of 180 days at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per day for delay in release of connection under Section 43(3) of Electricity Act,2003. A penalty of Rs.1,80,000/- is imposed upon the opposite party i.e. U.H.B.V.N. for delay in release of electricity connection to the Complainant Tara Chand within 45 days from today. The complaint is accepted with costs, which is assessed of Rs.11,000/-.

10.            In default of compliance of this order, proceedings shall be initiated under Section 72 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as non-compliance of court order shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one month, but which may extend to three years, or with fine, which shall not be less than twenty five thousand rupees, but which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.     

Announced in open 26.04.2024

 

                                                            (Dr. Neelima Shangla)            

                                                               President,

                                                               DCDRC, Kurukshetra.

 

(Neelam)                (Ramesh Kumar)

Member                   Member