State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Ex. Engineer E.D.D. vs Dev Raj Aata Chakki on 5 October, 2018
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UP C-1 Vikrant Khand 1 (Near Shaheed Path), Gomti Nagar Lucknow-226010 Revision Petition No. RP/79/2018 ( Date of Filing : 18 Apr 2018 ) (Arisen out of Order Dated 06/10/2017 in Case No. Ex/41/2016 of District Ghazipur) 1. Ex. Engineer E.D.D. Division I Ghazipur ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Dev Raj Aata Chakki Prop. Devraj S/O R/O Narwar Post Mardah Distt. Ghazipur ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN PRESIDENT For the Petitioner: For the Respondent: Dated : 05 Oct 2018 Final Order / Judgement Revision No.79/2018 EE, Electricity Distribution Div.-I, vs. Devraj Aata Chakki ORDER
5.10.2018 Ld. Counsel Mr. Mohan Agarwal appeared for revisionist. None appeared for respondent.
Heard ld. Counsel for revisionist and perused order dated 6.10.2017 passed by District Consumer Forum, Ghazipur on application dated 4.10.2017 moved by revisionist before District Forum in execution case no.41 of 2016, Devraj Aata Chakki vs. Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Div-I, Ghazipur. It is contended by ld. Counsel for revisionist that the District Forum vide its order dated 29.3.2016 passed in complaint case no.285 of 2014, Devraj Aata Chakki vs. Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Div-I, Ghazipur has ordered OP Electricity Department to refund the amount deposited by the complainant according to rules and ahs further ordered revisionist/OP to pay Rs.1,000.00 to complainant.
It is contended by ld. Counsel for revisionist that revisionist Electricity Department has issued certain articles in favour of the complainant now OP for his connection in question. Therefore, the revisionist has moved above application before the District Forum to direct complainant now OP to return the said articles to Electricity Department but the District Forum has vide impugned order rejected the application without application of mind.
I have considered submissions made by ld. Counsel for the revisionist.
Considering facts and circumstances as well as order passed by District Forum in complaint which is under execution in execution case, it appears just that revisionist should deposit the whole amount as ordered by the District Forum vide order dated 29.3.2016 and thereafter, the District Forum should consider the plea of revisionist who is opposite party in execution case for return of article alleged to have been issued in favour of the complainant in accordance with law.
Revision is disposed of with direction as mentioned above.
(Justice Akhtar Husain Khan) President Jafri PA II Court No.1 [HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN] PRESIDENT