State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
K.K. Ramasamy Raja, S/O. K.M. Kandasamy ... vs Executive Engineer, Tneb ( O & M), ... on 26 March, 2014
IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MADURAI BENCH.
Present: Thiru. A.K. ANNAMALAI, M.A.,M.L.,M.Phil., Presiding Judicial Member
F.A.No.129/2013
(Against the order in unnumbered C.C.S.R.No.60/2012, dated 14.03.2013 on the
file of DCDRF, Virudhunagar @ Srivilliputhur)
WEDNESDAY, THE 26th DAY OF MARCH 2014.
K.K. Ramasamy Raja,
S/o. K.M. Kandasamy Raja,
181, Ricemill Road,
Rajapalayam Town,
Virudhunagar District Appellant /Complainant
Vs
1. Executive Engineer,
TNEB ( O & M),
Ponnagaram, P.S.K. Nagar,
Rajapalayam - 626 108.
2. Junior Engineer (Town/South),
TNEB, Ponnagaram,
P.S.K. Nagar,
Rajapalayam - 626 108. Respondents/Opposite Parties
Counsel for Appellant/Complainant : Mr. V. Balaji, Advocate.
Counsel for Respondents/Opposite Parties: M/s.M. Mohan Babu &
R. Senthilkumar, Advocate.
This appeal coming before us for final hearing today on 26.03.2014 and
on hearing the arguments of both sides and upon perusing the material records
this Commission made the following:
2
ORDER
THIRU.A.K. ANNAMALAI, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER (Open Court)
1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant who filed a complaint before the District Forum, Srivilliputhur against the respondents/opposite parties alleging deficiency in service in disconnecting the electricity service connection existed for the complainant's saw mill without giving statutory period of 7days notice as per the document No.2, even though notice dated 25.10.2012 was served only on 01.11.2012 at 10.00 a.m. and within 2 hours at about 12.00 noon, the service connection was disconnected which is alleged to be deficiency in service against the opposite parties and thereby filed a consumer complaint claiming relief of compensation and the District Forum even without considering the details rejected the complaint in its order in C.C.S.R.No.60/2012, dated 14.03.2013, against which this appeal has been filed by the appellant/ complainant.
2. On the side of the respondents/opposite parties, Counsel Mr.M. Mohan Babu filed a memo of appearance and represented that since the mater is rejection of complaint, even without giving notice to the opposite parties the District Forum has passed order.
3. This Commission heard the arguments of the appellant side and perused the materials including the impugned order passed by the District Forum in this case. On perusal of the materials and details of the order passed by the District Forum, this Commission has to point out that as per the letter dated 3 25.10.2012 filed as document No.2 issued by the opposite parties directing the complainant to produce license issued by the Forest Department as per the High Court direction within 7 days from the date of receipt of notice failing which, electricity service connection would be disconnected and on the same letter it is seen that there is an endorsement for receipt of the same by the complainant on 01.11.2012 and the disconnection was made on the date itself. Further, the learned counsel for the appellant argued that the District Forum passed the order by going into the merits of the complaint itself erroneously without considering the prima facie cognizance of the case.
4. On the basis of appellant side arguments and on the allegations made in the complaint it is found that the opposite party even though issued notice dated 25.10.2012 which was served only on 01.11.2012 to the complainant and within few hours, electric service connection was said to have been disconnected even though as per the notice the complainant is entitled for 7 days notice for compliance and reply and without waiting for the statutory period of 7 days the opposite parties said to have disconnected the service connection which was already existed alleged to have been amounts to deficiency in service and thereby this Commission is of the considered opinion that the District Forum erroneously rejected the complaint which needs interference of this Commission by allowing this appeal. Accordingly,
5. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the order of the District Forum, Virudhunagar @ Srivilliputhur passed in unnumbered C.C.S.R.No.60/ 4 2012 dated 14.03.2013 is hereby set aside. The District Forum is directed to receive the complaint of the complainant by taking on file if otherwise in order and to proceed with the case and dispose of the same according to the law. The appellant/complainant is directed to appear before the District Forum, Virudhunagar @ Srivilliputhur on 22.04.2014 and to proceed with the case as per the directions of the District Forum and the District Forum shall dispose of the case as per the law. No order as to costs in this appeal.
A.K. ANNAMALAI, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER.
INDEX: YES / NO TCM/Mdu Bench/Orders- 2014/ M\arch