Haryana

Jind

CC/204/2013

Udey Pal - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

Sh D.S. Lochab

03 Aug 2016

ORDER

BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JIND. 
                                           Complaint No. 204 of 2013
   Date of Institution: 16.9.2013
   Date of final order: 3.8.2016

Udey Pal son of Sh. Badan Singh resident of village Kuchrana Khurd, Tehsil and District Jind.
                                                             ….Complainant.
                                       Versus
Utter Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. operation Sub Division, Uchana through its Sub Divisional Engineer.
                                                          …..Opposite party.
                          Complaint under section 12 of
              Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Before: Sh. Dina Nath Arora, President.
    Smt. Bimla Sheokand, Member.
            Sh. Mahinder Kumar Khurana, Member.    

Present:  Sh. D.S. Lochab Adv. for complainant.
              Sh. Suresh Goyal Adv. for opposite party. 
                   
ORDER:

             The brief facts in the complaint are that complainant is consumer of the opposite party vide electricity tube-well connection No. KT-042952-A and paying the consumption bills regularly  uptill the month of June, 2013 and no amount is outstanding against him qua the electricity connection. The complainant had paid the last bill amounting to Rs.2802/- on 24.6.2013 and after then no bill was issued to the complainant by the opposite party.  The opposite party illegally disconnected the electricity connection of the complainant vide PDCO 
            Udey Pal Vs. UHBVNL
                   …2…
dated 20.3.2013 without any reason or without issuing any notice to him. The PDCO dated 20.3.2013 is illegal, null and void and is  also against the natural justice without giving any opportunity of being heard and without issuance of any show cause notice. Deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party is alleged. It is prayed that the complaint be accepted and opposite party be directed to withdraw the PDCO dated 20.3.2012 by re-connecting/release the electricity connection of tube-well of the complainant immediately and the bill paid by him after PDCO may kindly be adjusted in the future bills. It is further alleged that to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of mental pain and agony  as well as to pay a sum of Rs. 11,000/- as litigation charges to the complainant. 
2.    Upon notice, the opposite party has appeared and filed the written statement stating in the preliminary objections i.e. the complaint is not maintainable in the present forum; the complainant has no  locus-standi to file the present complaint  and the complaint is false and  frivolous.  On merits, it is contended that the complainant had obtained tube-well connection on his field but after some time he shifted the said tube-well connection in the land of Gram Panchyat, Kuchrana by encroaching the land without permission and information of the opposite party. The premises of the complainant was checked on 20.3.2013 by the official of the Nigam and it was found that complainant illegally and unlawfully shifted the connection without permission and without depositing the expenses of shifting. The Gram Panchayat had raised objection  and moved an application before the 
            Udey Pal Vs. UHBVNL
                   …3…
court of SDM, Jind  and SDM, Jind passed an order to remove the connection from the land of Gram Panchayat. Thereafter, the connection of the complainant was disconnected by adopting the procedure of the Nigam. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Dismissal of complaint with costs is prayed for. 
3.    In  evidence, the complainant has produced his own affidavit Ex. C-1 and  electricity bills Ex. C-2 to Ex. C-6 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, the opposite party has produced the affidavit of SDO Ex. OP-1, copy of written statement filed in the Civil Court in case titled Udey Pal Vs. UHBVNL Ex. OP-2, copy of reply of  application Ex. OP-3, copy of checking report dated 20.3.2013 Ex. OP-4, copy of resolution Ex. OP-5, copy of disconnection order dated 7.5.2013 Ex. OP-6 and copy of  service connection order Ex. OP-7 and closed the evidence. 
4.    We have heard Ld. counsel of both the parties and also perused the record placed on file. The counsel for complainant argued that the complainant is consumer of opposite party and having electricity tube-well connection at his fields and no amount is outstanding against him qua the said tube-well connection but the opposite party illegally disconnected the said electricity tube-well connection on 20.3.2013 without any reason or without any issuing prior notice. The PDCO dated 20.3.2013 is illegal null and void and the same be set aside and connection may kindly be restored.

            Udey Pal Vs. UHBVNL
                   …4…
5.    On the other hand, counsel for opposite party argued that the tube-well connection in question was obtained by the complainant at his field but after some time the complainant had shifted the said tube-well connection in the land of Gram Panchayat Kuchrana without prior permission and information of the opposite party. The official of the Nigam had checked the site on 20.3.2013 and found that complainant illegally and unlawfully shifted the said connection without permission and without depositing the expenses of shifting. The Gram Panchayat had raised objection and moved an application before the SDM. On the application of the  Gram Panchayat the SDM passed an order to remove the connection from the land of Gram Panchayat. The counsel for opposite party further argued that the complainant has also filed a suit for permanent injunction before the Additional Civil Judge Sr. Division, Narwana on the same cause of action and the said suit was dismissed in default on 20.1.2015. Besides this the brother of the complainant has also filed a Civil Suit bearing No. 481 of 2012 titled as Dharam Pal Vs. Govt. of Haryana etc. before the Civil Judge Jr. Division, Jind and the said case is also pending for adjudication before the Court and prayed for dismissal of complaint. 
6.    After hearing Ld. counsel of both the parties and going through the record and  from the perusal of document Ex. OP-4 it clear that the checking party of Nigam had checked the tube-well connection of the complainant and reported that the complainant had shifted the electric connection of  his tube-well in the land of Gram Panchayat without prior permission or without depositing the necessary expenses. It is 
            Udey Pal Vs. UHBVNL
                   …5…
also  not disputed that complainant has filed the Civil Suit on the same cause of action before the Additional Civil Judge Sr. Division, Narwana which is clear from the document Ex. OP-2 and Ex. OP-3. We have also gone through the Resolution Ex. OP-5 which was passed by the Gram Panchayat Kuchrana Khurd, wherein it is clear that the complainant had illegally encroached the land of Gram Panchayat and shifted his electric tube-well connection. In this regard a complaint was also made by the Gram Panchayat before the SDM. 
7.    In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the firm view that the complainant illegally shifted his electric tube-well connection in the field of the Gram Panchayat and there is no deficiency  in service on the part of the opposite party to disconnect the tube-well connection of the complainant permanently. Hence, the complaint of the complainant is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of order be supplied to the parties under the rule. File be consigned to the record-room after due compliance.
Announced on: 3.8.2016

                                President,
 Member                 Member               District Consumer Disputes                                     Redressal Forum, Jind

 

 

 

                        Udey Pal Vs. UHBVNL
                   
                   
Present:  Sh. D.S. Lochab Adv. for complainant.
              Sh. Suresh Goyal Adv. for opposite party. 
                   

              Arguments heard. To come up on 3.8.2016 for orders. 
                                      President,
        Member              Member         DCDRF, Jind
                                  1.8.2016

Present:  Sh. D.S. Lochab Adv. for complainant.
              Sh. Suresh Goyal Adv. for opposite party. 
                   
           Order announced. Vide our separate order of even date, the complaint is dismissed. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.  
                                       President,
        Member              Member         DCDRF, Jind
                                 3.8.2016