Haryana

Yamunanagar

EA/18/2021

Hardeep Singh S/o Shri Dayal Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

Vishal Dhiman

22 Nov 2021

ORDER

Present:      Sh.Vishal Dhiman, Adv. for petitioner.

                   Sh.Ritesh Goel, Adv. for opponent.

 

            Petitioner has filed this execution for execution of order dated 8.2.2012 passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula (for short State Commission).

               Consumer Complaint No.660 of 2006 titled as Hardeep Singh vs. UHBVNL was filed before this commission, which was finally decided on 3.12.2008 and the complainant-petitioner was directed to deposit the demanded amount of Rs.20000/-+Rs.7000/- by the opponent for the purpose of release of electricity connection for his tube well. The said amount of Rs.27000/- was not deposited by the complainant within the period of one month from the date of order i.e. 3.12.2008 and thereby the opponent filed an appeal bearing No.412 of 2009 before the State Commission and the State Commission vide order dated 8.2.2012 dismissed the appeal filed by the opponent, granting one month time to the complainant/petitioner to deposit the amount of Rs.27000/-.  The complainant failed to deposit the same and now execution has been filed before this Commission on the ground, order dated 8.2.2012 was received by his minor child and it was not in his knowledge, so now he has come to know about the order.  So direction to be given to the opponent to receipt the amount of Rs.20000/- consent money+Rs.7000/- cost of pole.

                 In the case in hand, whatever reason may be, the complainant-petitioner himself has not deposited the amount of Rs.27000/- within the stipulated period as ordered by the State Commission on 8.2.2012. This commission is of the firm view, in case extension of time is to be granted to the complainant to deposit the amount of Rs.27000/-, then, it is to be granted by the State Commission, which passed the order dated 8.2.2012.  Direction by this Commission to the opponent to accept the amount of Rs.27000/- from the complainant will tentmount to exercise the jurisdiction of the State Commission by this commission, which shall not be in propriety. The execution petition is dismissed, being not maintainable before this Commission, at this stage, Complainant-petitioner is advised to seek extension of time from the State Commission and if he is permitted, then, he shall be at liberty to file a fresh execution petitioner before this Commission. File be consigned to the records.

 

                                                                          President,

                                                                        DCDRC, YNR,           

   L.Member.         Member                               22.11.2021.

 

 

 

Typed by Gaphoor Deen, Assistant.