BSES

First Appeal No.2009/706

(Arising out of Order dated 27.04.2009 passed by the District Consumer Forum(South-II) Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi in Complaint Case No.994/2007)

1. Delhi Development Authority….Appellant /OP

Through Vice Chairman Through Ms. M. Bhattarcharjee

Vikas Sadan, New Delhi advocate.

2. BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd.,

Nehru Place, New Delhi.

3. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Town Hall, Delhi.

Versus

1. Sh. Gaurav Garg …. Respondent/Complainant

S/o Dr.H.B. Singh



2. Smt. Monica Garg,

W/o Sh. Gaurav Garg,

Both R/o 155, Jasola

Pocket No.1, New Delhi.


CORAM

Justice Barkat Ali Zaidi ... President

Sh. M.L. Sahni … Member


1. Whether reporters of local newspapers be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?

Justice Barkat Ali Zaidi, President(ORAL)



1. Complaint case No.994/2007 filed by the respondent complainant was decided on 27.04.2009 against which the appellant OP has come in appeal before this Commission. Since the appeal has been filed beyond prescribe limitation appellant OP has filed an application alongwith affidavit of the Director (RL) for condonation of delay of 117 days involved in the appeal.

2. We have heard Ms. Madhumita Bhattacharjee, Counsel for the appellant Delhi Development Authority.

3. According to the applicant(appellant) himself there is delay of 117 days, which is too long a period. The only ground given in the application for condonation of delay is that the decision to file an appeal by the authorities took a long period. This is wholly a unsatisfactory ground for condonation of delay. The delay is therefore, unexplained.

4. The application for codonation of delay is therefore rejected. Appeal is time barred and is consequently rejected.

5. FDR/Bank Guarantee, if any deposited by the appellant be released in favour of the appellant subject to complete of formalities.

6. 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.

Announced on 19th day of January 2010.

BSES

Case No.540/09

Vimla Anand, 902 GR-3, Pkt.-C, Hastsal, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi – 59.

…..Complainant

Versus

BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd., Distt. Center Janakpuri, New Delhi.

……..Opposite Parties



CORAM : J.P. SHARMA : PRESIDENT

: S.M. MAZUMDAR : MEMBER

: DR. PREMLATA : MEMBER



O R D E R

J.P. SHARMA (PRESIDENT) :

Complainant in this case is being supplied electricity vide K.No.2650 W125 0324 (CRN No.2650007400). Earlier on 25.09.2007 for non payment of dues, the electricity was disconnected by BSES but on 14.11.2007, complainant paid the disputed dues of Rs.6,860/- to BSES. Thereafter, the electricity was restored after a long period by of dues having been paid. Further the disputed demand of Rs.5,660/- was raised by BSES and therefore, complainant approached this Forum for quashing of the disputed bill and for grant of compensation on account of electricity having been restored after a long interval. During the proceedings today (on 21.12.2009), Sh.I. Khan, Ld. Counsel for BSES submitted that they had revised the bill for Rs.5,660/- to Rs.930/- only. Complainant’s AR accepted this offer but pressed for compensation for delayed restoration of electricity supply and for raising the disputed bill.

Keeping in view the material on record, we direct BSES to pay a compensation of Rs.1,500/- also to the complainant for the deficiency in service on their part which resulted into undue harassment to the complainant.

BSES shall comply with the above mentioned order within 30 days of its receipt failing which proceedings u/s 25/27 of Consumer Protection Act may be initiated against them.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge. Thereafter, the file be consigned to the Record Room.