HP State Electricity Board
This is a discussion on HP State Electricity Board within the Judgments forums, part of the General Discussions category; H.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SHIMLA Appeal No. 23/2008. Date of Decision 23.3.2009. 1. HP State Electricity Board, through ...
- 09-02-2009, 12:16 PM #1
HP State Electricity Board
H.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SHIMLA
Appeal No. 23/2008.
Date of Decision 23.3.2009.
1. HP State Electricity Board, through its Secretary,
Vidyut Bhawan, Shimla 171 001.,
2. Assistant Engineer, HPSEB, Electrical Sub
Division, Jutog, Distt. Shimla, HP.
Sh. Anil Kumar Ghai, S/o Sh. Amar Nath Ghai,
R/o HP Milkfed Diary Colony, Totu, Shimla-11, HP.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Goel, President.
Hon’ble Mrs. Saroj Sharma, Member.
Hon’ble Mr. Chander Shekher Sharma, Member.
Whether Approved for reporting? No.
For the Appellant. Mr. B.S. Ranjan, Advocate with Mr. R.P.
Modgil, SDO HPSEB, Jutog who has
been identified as such by Mr. Ranjan.
For the Respondent. Mr. S.S. Roach, Advocate vice counsel
Mr. Peeyush Verma, Advocate.
O R D E R:
Justice Arun Kumar Goel (Retd.) President (Oral)
Facts giving rise to this appeal are, that wife of the respondent was found to have inserted X-ray film in the electricity supply meter with a view to pilfer the same when she was caught red-handed by the staff of the HP State Electricity Board. She admitted this fact in writing copy whereof is Annexure RA-1. Appellants raised claim of Rs. 8862/- as result of it against the respondent. This amount according to learned counsel for the parties stands already deposited by the respondent.
2. During the course of audit, the Auditors observed, that instead of the amount of Rs. 8862/-, respondent was liable to pay Rs. 32,145/-. In this background respondent was billed by the appellant vide Annexure A-1, creating a demand of this sum. This was challenged in Complaint No. 204/2004.
3. As according to respondent he was not liable to pay this amount, therefore he filed the complaint for setting aside the bill Annexure A-1 by the appellants, besides claiming compensation, damages, costs etc.
4. Before the District Forum below as well as before us also, stand of the appellants is, that the amount has been claimed vide Annexure A-1 was on the basis of the audit objection. At this stage Mr. Ranjan also pointed out that so far pilfering of electricity is concerned, it is not only proved, but was also admitted by the wife of the respondent Smt. Neelam Ghai vide Annexure A-1.
5. Ordinarily such acts of omission and commission on the part of a consumer, like respondent have to be deprecated to the strongest terms, however when the demand of Rs. 8862/- was created by the appellants, they should have either reserved to themselves right to claim any additional amount subsequently in case of audit objection or the like situation or else should not have settled the matter at this amount. There was no such reservation made by the appellants when they accepted the sum of Rs. 8,862/- from the respondent. Audit objection is the internal matter with which a consumer, like respondent is not concerned. That being the position, we are of the view that the decision of the District Forum below suffers from no infirmity which may call for any interference in this appeal.
6. Mr. Ranjan faced with this situation submitted that if the impugned order is upheld it will encourage pilferage of electricity by consumers like respondent, as such with a view to check this menace, this appeal deserves to be allowed. This argument is being noted simply to be rejected, because amount of Rs. 8,862/- was accepted by the appellants without any reservation.
7. No other point is urged.
In view of the aforesaid discussion while dismissing the appeal, order passed by District Forum Shimla, in Consumer Complaint No. 204/2004 dated 1.9.2007 is upheld, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
All interim orders passed from time to time in this appeal shall stand vacated forthwith.
Learned counsel for the parties have undertaken to collect copy of this order from the Court Secretary free of cost as per rules.
23rd March, 2009 (Justice Arun Kumar Goel) Retd.
(Chander Shekher Sharma)
- By Advocate.sonia in forum ElectricityReplies: 196Last Post: 04-30-2013, 07:24 PM
- By Joginder Paul. in forum ElectricityReplies: 9Last Post: 07-14-2012, 12:57 AM
- By admin in forum ElectricityReplies: 5Last Post: 02-11-2010, 11:26 AM
- By adv.sumit in forum BankingReplies: 2Last Post: 10-03-2009, 11:13 AM
- By Advocate.sonia in forum JudgmentsReplies: 0Last Post: 09-02-2009, 12:26 PM