State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Rajender Prasad Sharma vs Bses Yamuna Power Ltd on 8 May, 2007
IN THE STATE COMMISSION:DELHI IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI (Constituted under Section 9 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of Decision: 08.05.2007 Appeal No. 83/2004 (Arising out of Order dated 09-01-2004 passed by the District Consumer Forum(North),Tis Hazari Courts, Old Civil supplies Building, Delhi in Case No. 465/2002) Mr. Rajender Prasad Sharma Appellant S/o Sh. Ulfat Ram Sharma, through R/o 2293 GF, Gali Paharwali, Mr. Anoop sharma Nai Sarak, advocate. Delhi. Versus BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. Respondent Central District, Chandni Chowk, Delhi Through Its Accounts Officer Having Its Regd. Office at Shakti Kiran Building, Karkardooma, Delhi-110032. CORAM: Justice J.D. Kapoor President Mr.Mahesh Chandra Member
1. Whether Reporters of local newspapers be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
Justice J.D. Kapoor, President (Oral)
1. Vide impugned order dated 09.01.2004 the complaint of the appellant seeking rectification of the electricity bill raised by the respondent was dismissed merely on the ground that the complainant has already filed a civil suit in this regard.
2. The perusal of the impugned order shows that the facts represented by the respondent were incorrect as it was during the pendency of the instant complaint before the District Forum that the respondent issued a bill of Rs. 1873.10 with a threat of disconnection of electricity and when he went to deposit the bill the respondent refused to accept it and disconnected the electricity. Appellant had sought temporary injunction by filing the civil suit against disconnecting the electricity.
3. As is apparent, the dispute before the civil court was of altogether different nature whereas the relief sought before the District Forum was for rectification of electricity bills raised by the respondent from time to time.
4. Remedy under the Consumer Protection Act is independent and additional remedy. A consumer is also entitled to seek a compensation which he may not be able to seek before the civil court for deficiency and raising of the incorrect bills causing mental agony and harassment. The dispute involved before the civil court and the complaint before the District Forum were of different nature and therefore the complaint was wrongly dismissed.
5. In the result, the appeal is allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is sent back to the District Forum for deciding it afresh on merits.
6. For the aforesaid purpose the parties shall appear before the District Forum on 02.7.2007
7. Bank Guarantee/FDR, if any furnished by the appellant, be returned forthwith.
8. A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to Record room.
9. Announced on 8th day of May, 2007.
(Justice J.D. Kapoor) President (Mahesh Chandra) Member ysc