Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/21/207

Munish Kumar Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

Punjab state Power Corporation Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Shekhar Gupta

25 Jul 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No: 207 dated 09.04.2021                                  

                      Date of decision: 25.07.2022  

Munish Kumar Gupta son of Late Sh.Parmod Kumar Gupta, resident of House No.17, Phase-III, Karnail Singh Nagar, Ludhiana.                                                                                                                               ..…Complainant

                                                Versus

1.Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Model Town, Ludhiana through its Executive Engineer.

2. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall, Patiala, through its Chairman.

3.Raghav Khosla son of Omkar Kholsa, resident of House No.665/5/1B, Street No.2, New Upkar Nagar, Civil Lines, Ludhiana.

4.Neha Khosla daughter of Omkar Kholsa, resident of House No.665/5/1B, Street No.2, New Upkar Nagar, Civil Lines, Ludhiana.                                                                                                                            …..Opposite Parties

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act,

QUORUM:

SH. K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

SH.JASWINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant            :         None

For OP1 and OP2          :         Sh.Mandeep Sharma, Advocate

For OP3 and OP4          :         Exparte

 

ORDER

PER K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

1.                           Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he had taken an independent house bearing No.17, Street No.11, Karnail Singh Nagar, Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana from the OP3 on monthly rent of Rs.20,000/-. OP4 is the owner of the property while OP3 is the landlord. Sometimes ago, OP3 and OP4 started pressurizing the complainant to vacate the house and in this regard, the complainant filed a civil suit for permanent injunction against the OP3 and OP4 who later on filed an ejectment petition against the complainant.

2.                It has further been alleged in the complaint that an electric connection bearing account No.3015044139 was installed in the house in question in the name of Kuldip Singh. The complainant was using the said electric connection in the capacity of tenant and had also been paying the bills regularly. However, the OP3 and OP4 moved an application with the OP1 and got the connection disconnected on 01.04.2021. The complainant contacted the officials of the OP1 and requested them to restore the connection but to no avail. This amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the OP1 as the complainant has been residing in the house where the connection was installed with his family members including the ailing mother of 80 years. In the end, it has been requested that the OP1 and OP2 be directed to install a fresh electric meter in the house in question and be also directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant on account of mental tension and harassment caused to him.

3.                The complaint has been resisted by the OPs. In the joint written statement filed on behalf of the OP1 and OP2, it has been, inter alia, pleaded that neither the complaint is maintainable nor the complainant is holder of electric connection No.3015044139. According to the OP1 and OP2, the complaint has been filed on wrong facts as the complainant has suppressed the material facts while filing the present complaint. Moreover, the complainant is not a consumer of the OP1 and OP2. According to the OP1 and OP2, the electric connection No.3015044139 was installed and disconnected on the request of OP3 and OP4. No relationship of service provider and consumer is exists between the parties. The rest of the averments made in the complaint have been denied as wrong and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has also been made.

4.                Earlier, Sh.Mohit Chandi, Advocate was appeared on behalf of OP3 and OP4 and when the case was pending for filing written statement, OP3 and OP4 absented from the proceedings and also failed to file the written reply despite granting sufficient opportunities and were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 20.12.2021.

5.                In this case, none has been appearing on behalf of the complainant since 12.11.2021 nor any rejoinder along with affidavit or documents have been formally tendered by the complainant. We have heard the counsel for the OP1 and OP2 and have gone through the record and proceed to decide this complaint on merits.

6.                By way of this complaint, the complainant has claimed that he has been using the connection in dispute in the capacity of a tenant of OP3 and OP4. Admittedly, the connection in question installed in the name of Kuldip Singh which has neither been got transferred to the name of OP3 nor in the name of OP4 who is stated to be the landlord of the property in question where the connection was installed. The complainant has claimed that he has filed a civil suit for permanent injunction against the OP3 and OP4 but no record of said civil suit has been placed on record nor any order passed in the said civil suit has been tendered in evidence. It has also been claimed that an ejectment petition was filed by the OP4 against the complainant but again no record of said ejectment petition nor any order passed in the said proceedings has been placed on record. Admittedly, the connection in question is neither transferred in the name of the complainant nor the same is in the name of the OP3 and OP4. Therefore, the complainant does not prove to be a consumer of the OP1 and OP2. Even otherwise, it appears to be a case of dispute between the tenant and landlord regarding which litigation in the Civil as well as in the court of Rent Controller is already stated to be pending. Besides, no worthwhile evidence has been lead by the complainant in this case. In these circumstances, we are of the considered view that no case for restoration of the electric connection as prayed for in the complaint is made out.

7.                           As a result of above discussion, the complaint fails and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

                     (Jaswinder Singh)                      (K.K. Kareer)                                              Member                                   President

Announced in Open Commission                                           Dated:25.07.2022                                                                                    Gurpreet Sharma.