Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.25 seconds)Section 42 in The Electricity Act, 2003 [Entire Act]
Suresh Jindal vs Bses Rajdhani Power Limited & Ors on 11 October, 2007
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/08/2024 at 22:21:46
the Commission acquire jurisdiction to decide the matter
when a forum has been created under the Act for this
purpose. The matter should have been left to the said
forum. This question has already been considered and
decided by a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in
Suresh Jindal v. BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. [(2006) 132
DLT 339 (DB)] and Dheeraj Singh v. BSES Yamuna
Power Ltd. [Ed. : (2006) 127 DLT 525 (DB)] and we
approve of these decisions. It has been held in these
decisions that the forum and ombudsman have power to
grant interim orders. Thus a complete machinery has
been provided in Sections 42(5) and 42(6) for redressal of
grievances of individual consumers. Hence wherever a
forum/ombudsman have been created the consumers can
only resort to these bodies for redressal of their
grievances. Therefore, not much is required to be
discussed on this issue. As the aforesaid two decisions
correctly lay down the law when an individual consumer
has a grievance he can approach the forum created under
sub-section (5) of Section 42 of the Act.
Section 86 in The Electricity Act, 2003 [Entire Act]
Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory ... vs Reliance Energy Ltd. & Ors on 14 August, 2007
The relevant paragraphs of the
decision in Reliance Energy (supra) are extracted as
under:-
Mr. Dheeraj Singh vs Bses Yamuna Power Limited on 18 November, 2005
While affirming the decision
passed by this Court in Suresh Jindal v. BSES Rajdhani
Power Ltd. &Ors. and Dheeraj Singh v. BSES Yamuna
Power Ltd., wherein, it was held that the CGRF and the
Ombudsman has the authority to pass an interim order as
well, the Supreme Court further held that Sections 42(5)
and 42(6) provide a complete machinery for redressal of
grievances of the consumers. The Supreme Court in the
said case remitted the matter back to the CGRF for
adjudication on merits.
Imran Ahmed vs Tata Power Delhi Distribution Limited on 30 May, 2023
1. The petitioner in the instant writ petition has prayed for directions to
the respondent to install the electricity connection over the property bearing
No.: F-53, Third Floor, part of Khasra No.247/2, Abul Fazal Enclave Part-1,
Jamia Nagar, Okhla, New Delhi-110025. It is however seen that for the
ventilation of grievance raised by the petitioner, there already exists a
statutory remedy in terms of Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003. This
Court vide order dated 06.08.2024 in W.P.(C) 7692/2023 titled as Imran
Ahmed v. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Limited has held as under:-
Purandeep Singh vs Bses Yamuna Power Ltd on 15 February, 2022
2. This Court while dealing controversy in W.P.(C). 2873/2022 titled as
Purandeep Singh v. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd., has relied upon the
decision in W.P.(C) 10079/2004 titled as Mr. Amrit Singh v. BSES
Rajdhani Power Ltd. (BRPL) and has held as under:-
Amrit Paul Singh vs Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd on 27 September, 2019
2. This Court while dealing controversy in W.P.(C). 2873/2022 titled as
Purandeep Singh v. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd., has relied upon the
decision in W.P.(C) 10079/2004 titled as Mr. Amrit Singh v. BSES
Rajdhani Power Ltd. (BRPL) and has held as under:-
Ashok Yadav vs Bses Rajdhani Power Limited & Anr on 21 September, 2023
14. Notably, the decision of this Court in the cases of
Abhijit Anand v. Chairman Delhi Electricity Regulatory
Commission and Ashok Yadav v. BSES Rajdhani Power
Limited also aid to the similar position of law as has been
rendered in the case of Ram Kishan (supra).
1