State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs Chander Mohan on 13 February, 2014
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
PUNJAB, DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR-37A, CHANDIGARH
FIRST APPEAL NO.1405 OF 2011
Date of Institution: 19.09.2011
Date of Decision: 13.02.2014
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.
.....Appellant/Opposite Party
VERSUS
Chander Mohan s/o Manohar Lal, r/o Sadar Nagar, Street No.1, Near
Bajwa Nagar, Puli, Opp.M.T.Jipper, Ludhiana.
.....Respondent/Complainant
First Appeal against the order
dated 15.7.2011 passed by the
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Ludhiana.
Quorum:
Hon'ble Mr.Justice Gurdev Singh, President
Sh. Baldev Singh Sekhon, Member
Smt. Surinder Pal Kaur, Member Present:
For the appellant : Sh.A.S.Chaudhary, Advocate For the respondent : None BALDEV SINGH SEKHON, MEMBER This appeal has been filed by the appellant/opposite party against the order dated 15.7.2011 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ludhiana (in short "District Forum"), vide which the complaint of the respondent/complainant against it was partly allowed and opposite party was directed to raise a fresh demand against checking dated 10.9.2008. The amount deposited, if any, with the opposite party was ordered to be refunded or to be adjusted in the revised demand/bills.First Appeal No.1405 of 2011 2
2. The facts, in brief, are that the complainant was having a small power electric connection, bearing account No.SP02/119. The opposite party issued a provisional order of assessment No.73 dated 13.1.2009 under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, claiming Rs.9,56,806/-, on account of theft of electricity against the checking report No.31/316 dated 10.9.2008. He filed the objections against this illegal demand. Thereafter, the demand was reduced to Rs.3,99,536/- through final assessment order No.1253 dated 31.3.2009. This demand was also challenged by him before the District Forum.
3. Upon notice, the opposite party filed written reply pleading therein that it was a case of theft of electricity and order of assessment was made under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for which remedy of appeal lied with the Sub Divisional Magistrate and the Additional Deputy Commissioner. In fact, the connection of the complainant was checked by Sh.Daljit Singh, Senior Executive Engineer, Enforcement 2 and Sh.R.S.Tung, Senior Executive Engineer Enforcement 3, vide ECR No.3168/31 dated 10.9.2008 and during checking they were found unauthorisedly using connected load of 43.062 KW against the sanctioned load of 19.9 KW. A provisional order of assessment No.73 dated 13.1.2009 for a demand of Rs.9,56,806/- was served upon the complainant and on the receipt of the objections from the complainant the amount was reduced to Rs.3,99,536/-, vide order No.73 dated 13.1.2009, which was legal and valid.
First Appeal No.1405 of 2011 3
4. The District Forum, after going through the evidence led by the parties partly allowed the complaint, vide aforesaid order.
5. Aggrieved by this order, the opposite parties have come up in appeal.
6. As per the pleadings/allegations levelled by the opposite parties, the subject matter of this case is covered U/s 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.5466 of 2012 (arising out of SLP (C) No.35906 of 2011) titled as "U.P. Power Corporation Limited & Ors. Vs Anis Ahmad", decided on 1st July, 2013, dealt with the complaints filed against the assessment made U/s 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 or any action taken U/s 135 to 140 of the said Act and after detailed discussion, held as follows:-
"A complaint against the assessment made by assessing officer under Section 126 or against the offences committed under Sections 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003, is not maintainable before a Consumer Forum".
8. Since the subject matter of this case is covered U/s 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and, as such, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the complaint filed by the respondent/complainant was not maintainable. The District Forum had no jurisdiction to deal with the subject matter covered u/s 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
9. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellants/opposite parties is accepted, the order of the District Forum, accepting the complaint, First Appeal No.1405 of 2011 4 is set aside and the complaint filed by the complainant is dismissed without prejudice to the rights of the complainant to seek his appropriate remedy before the proper authority under the Electricity Act, 2003. The time spent by him before the District Forum and in this Commission while prosecuting the complaint and the appeal shall be excluded by that authority while computing the period of limitation for filing the appeal etc.
10. The appeal could not be decided within the statutory period because of the heavy pendency of the court cases.
(JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH) PRESIDENT (BALDEV SINGH SEKHON) MEMBER (SURINDER PAL KAUR) MEMBER February 13, 2014 VINAY