DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, CAMP COURT AT AMRITSAR, PUNJAB.

          Complaint Case No: RBT/CC/2018/384

Date of Institution: 29.05.2018/29.11.2021

                               Date of Decision: 06.06.2022

1. Chanchal Rani wife of Sh. Pawan Kumar resident of H.No. 970, Takia Chanana Shah, Near Qila Gobind Garh O/s Lohgarh Gate, Amritsar.
2. Usha Rani wife of Mangre Ram resident of H.No. 970, Takia Chanan Shah, Near Qila Gobind Garh O/s Lohgarh Gate, Amritsar. 

…Complainant

Versus

1. The Executive Engineer, Tunda Talab Sub Division Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Hall Gate, Amritsar.
2. The Sub Divisional Officer, Tunda Talab Sub Division, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Hall Gate, Amritsar.

…Opposite Parties

Complaint Under Section 11 & 12 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Present: Sh. Pardeep Arora Adv counsel for complainant.

    Sh. Manohar Singh Adv counsel for the opposite parties.

Quorum.-

1. Sh. Ashish Kumar Grover: President

2. Sh. Navdeep Kumar Garg : Member

(ORDER BY ASHISH KUMAR GROVER, PRESIDENT):

The present complaint has been received by transfer from District Consumer Commission, Amritsar in compliance of the order dated 26.11.2021 of the Hon'ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh. The complainant Lakhwinder Singh filed the present complaint under Section 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Amritsar. (in short the opposite parties).

2. The facts leading to the present complaint as stated by the complainant are that the complainant purchased a premises H.No. 970, Takia Chanan Shah, Near Qila Gobind Garh O/s Lohgarh Gate, Amritsar from the complainant No. 2 i.e. her mother vide agreement dated 26.4.2018, as such the complainant become the owner in possession of the same and got every right to install a electric connection. The complainant applied for a domestic electric connection vide security receipt No. 3004882212 dated 21.2.2018 and the complainant submitted the documents to the opposite parties but the opposite parties vide its memo No. 110 dated 9.3.2018 refused to install the electric connection over the said property. The on the basis of said agreement the complainant once again applied for the electric connection vide receipt dated 27.4.2018 and deposited prior requisite/security amount to the opposite party, but this time again the officials of the opposite party clearly refused to install the electric connection in the house. The complainant requested the officials of the opposite parties to consider her request sympathetically as the summer season has started and it is very difficult for her family which includes her two children but of no use. The above said act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Hence, the present complaint is filed for seeking the following reliefs.-

1) The opposite parties may be directed to install the electric connection/meter in the house of the complainant No. 1 on the security already deposited by the complainant No. 2.

2) To pay Rs. 30,000/- on account of compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs. 11,000/- as litigation expenses.

3.                Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite parties filed written statement taking preliminary objections interalia on the grounds of no cause of action, not come with clean hands etc. On merits, it is submitted that the complainant had applied for electric connection and deposited Rs. 1390/- as security on 21.2.2018 vide receipt No. 3004882212 and the case was handed over to the JE for necessary action. The said JE reported that where the connection was applied on the name of Smt. Chanchal Rani but the possession was under of her mother and due to this the connection should be applied on the name of her mother and the complainant was informed vide memo No. 110 dated 9.3.2018. After rejection of application Chanchal Rani again applied for new connection and deposited Rs. 1390/- vide application No. 100005784060 dated 27.4.2018 on the same facts. Moreover Chanchal Rani submitted her Adhaar Card and given the address Chanchal Rani wife of Pawan Kumar 983 Gurunanakpura Mandir wali Gali Amritsar and new Adhaar Card of Chanchal Rani wife of Pawan Kumar H.No. 970, Takia Chanan Shah Amritsar outside Lohgarh Gate, Amritsar. In self declaration Chanchal Rani showed her possession of 12 years whereas in new applied connection she mentioned her possession of 20 years which is self contradictory. As such, there is no deficiency in service on their part and prayed for the dismissal of complaint.

4.                At the time of filing the present complaint the complainant filed her affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C-1 to C-7. Replication to the written version filed by the complainant.

 5.               To rebut the case of the complainant the opposite parties at the time of filing written statement have filed affidavit of Sh. Baljit Singh SDO Ex.O.P1/A, alongwith documents Ex.O.P-1 to Ex.O.P-8.

6.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record on the file.

7.                The complainant applied for a domestic electric connection in the premises of complainant. The complainant alleged that the said house was purchased from the complainant No. 2 by the complainant No. 1 vide agreement dated 26.4.2018 and the complainant become the owner in possession of the same and the opposite parties refused to install the electric connection over the said property vide memo No. 110 dated 9.3.2018 vide which the opposite parties objected that the possession of the said property is not with the complainant No. 1 and same in the possession of her mother i.e. complainant No. 2. The opposite parties filed written version and alleged that the complainant earlier applied for the electric connection and deposited Rs. 1390 /- vide receipt dated 21.2.2018 and the concerned JE was inspected the spot and reported that where the meter was to be installed under the possession of the mother of the complainant. Therefore, the opposite parties denied to release the electric connection. The complainant again applied for the new connection in the same premises and deposited Rs. 1390/- vide application dated 27.4.2018 and also submitted the Adhaar Card of the same address. But the opposite parties again refused to release the connection and alleged that in self declaration Chanchal Rani showed her possession of 12 years whereas in new applied connection she mentioned her possession of 20 years. Both self declarations can be perused. The agreement dated 26.4.2018 in which she purchased the house shows the possession of the complainant is self contradictory which can be perused. The concerned JE visited the premises again and reported which was conveyed to the complainant vide memo No. 324 dated 22.5.2018 by the SDO Tunda Talab Sub Division PSPCL Amritsar.

8.                On the perusal of the file it is established that the complainant has deposited the connection fee and she submitted the receipt Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-4. The complainant also produced the document Ex.C-5 vide which she purchased the premises in question from the Usha Rani i.e. Complainant No. 2. It is mentioned in the said agreement that the possession of the house in question is delivered to the Chanchal Rani wife of Pawan Kumar and the Usha Rani has no concern with the possession of the said house. The complainant has also produced the memo No. 324 dated 22.5.2018 vide which the opposite parties refused to release the connection by raising objection that the premises in question is under the possession of mother of the complainant and it is inquired  from the Neighborhood and come to know that the Chanchal Rani is not residing in the premises. But the opposite parties failed to produce any statement or document of the Neighborhood to prove this fact that the complainant is not residing in the premises in question. On the other hand the complainant has produced the several photographs to establish the possession of the complainant in the alleged house/premises. This fact is also established from the agreement Ex.C-5. From the above said discussion it is cleared that the complainant shown under owner in possession of the house in question. There is clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties by not releasing the electric connection in favour of the complainant No. 1. Therefore, the present complaint is allowed and the opposite parties are directed to install the electric connection/meter in the favour of complainant No. 1 on the security already deposited by the complainants. Opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs. 5,500/- on account of mental tension and harassment and litigation expenses. Compliance of the order be made within the period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. Copy of the order will be supplied to the parties by the District Consumer Commission, Amritsar as per rules. File be sent back to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar.

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:

6^th Day of June, 2022

(Ashish Kumar Grover)

President

(Navdeep Kumar Garg)

Member