
View 4086 Cases Against Vidyut
RAMRAJ MISHRA filed a consumer case on 05 Apr 2019 against GRAMIN VIDYUT SAHAKARI SAMITI MYDT. AND OTHER'S in the StateCommission Consumer Court. The case no is A/08/2816 and the judgment uploaded on 08 Apr 2019.
M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2816 OF 2008
(Arising out of order dated 30.09.2008 passed in C.C.No.559/2007 by District Forum, Satna)
RAMRAJ MISHRA … APPELLANT
Versus
JUNIOR ENGINEER, GRAMIN VIDYUT SAHAKARI
SAMITI MARYADIT, M.P.POORVA KSHETRA VIDYUT
VITRAN COMPANY LIMITED & ORS. … RESPONDENTS.
BEFORE:
HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHANTANU S. KEMKAR : PRESIDENT
HON’BLE DR. MRS MONIKA MALIK : MEMBER
O R D E R
05.04.2019
Shri Deepesh Joshi, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Ajay Dubey, learned counsel for the respondents.
As per Shri Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar :
Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 30.09.2008 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Satna (For short ‘Forum’) in C.C.No.559/2007 whereby the Forum has dismissed the complaint, the complainant has filed this appeal.
2. Brief facts of the case as stated by the appellant/complainant are that he had applied for an electricity connection for running flour mill under Prime Minister Employment Scheme from the opposite party/respondent M. P. Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Company Limited (For short ‘Electricity Company’). It is stated that despite repeated requests electricity connection was not given and the bills were raised. The complainant therefore filed a complaint before the District Forum.
3. The Forum dismissed the complaint holding that the electricity connection was provided to the complainant but he failed to pay any bill and only to escape from the liability of paying penal bills, he has filed this complaint. Hence this appeal.
4. Having heard learned counsel for parties and on perusal of record we find that the record reveals that present case is based on allegation of theft of electricity by unauthorized use of electricity. Appellant was granted electricity
-2-
connection no.5593 on 16.11.1995, thereafter on account of non-payment of bills, the said connection was temporarily disconnected. Officers of the respondent inspected the premises of the appellant on 20.08.2007 and found the appellant was using the electricity connection illegally by connecting it through wire, whereas his electricity connection was disconnected earlier. Panchnama to that effect was prepared. Accordingly, under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, penal bill was raised. The Supreme Court in the case of U.P.Power Corporation Limited & Ors. Vs Anis Ahmad, III (2013) CPJ 1 (SC) has held that a Consumer Forum cannot derive power to adjudicate a dispute in relation to assessment made or offences under Section 126 and 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003 as acts of indulging in unauthorized use of electricity as defined under Section 126 or committing offence under Section 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act do not fall within the ambit of Consumer Protection Act.
5. In view of the aforesaid, in our considered view, the Forum had no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint in respect of grievance raised by the complainant. The complaint being not maintainable before the Forum has rightly been dismissed by the Forum.
6. As a result, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order.
7. The appeal fails and is dismissed.
(Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar) (Dr. Monika Malik)
President Member
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.