Haryana

Yamunanagar

MA/9/2021

UHBVNL - Complainant(s)

Versus

Rajinder Singh S/o Beeja Ram - Opp.Party(s)

Bhupinder Sandilya

26 May 2022

ORDER

MA No.9 of 2021.

UHBVNL    Vs.      Rajinder.

 

Present:          Sh. Bhupinder K. Shandilya, Adv. for the applicant/respondent

                        Sh. SS Saini, Adv. for the complainant.

 

               Heard on the application dated 22.12.2021 filed by the respondent/applicant Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (respondents in original complaint) vide the applicant has prayed for review of the order dated 24.11.2021 passed by this Commission. The counsel for the complainant filed reply to the application and opposed the application.

                       From perusal of the order dated 24.11.2021, one thing is very much clear, earlier in order to supply electricity connection to the complainant, the respondent erected the poles for putting electricity line but the neighbourer of the complainant uprooted the poles.

                        It is correct the poles erected and then uprooted were property of the respondent Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited. It failed to take any action against the neighbourer of the complainant, but the same time, complainant had also not complained against his neighbourer in this regard to the police or to the respondent Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited. This fact has not been appreciated. This fact is skipped from the mind of the Commission while passing of the order dated 24.11.2021. During the course of arguments, it has candidly conceded by Sh. SS Saini, Adv. for the complainant that the order dated 24.11.2021 has been implemented by the respondents to the extent of sanction of release of electricity connection in his favour.

                      The complainant himself was also at fault by not disclosing the name of his neighbourer who uprooted the electricity poles. This fact skipped from the mind of the Commission due to some oversight so, the awarding compensation in his favour against the respondent was not justified. Therefore, this Commission by exercising power under Section 40 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 accept the application filed by the respondent Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and modified the order dated 24.11.2021 passed by this Commission, treated to be reviewed, to the extent of no liability of the respondent to make payment of punitive damages to the complainant. The record of complaint No.123 of 2020 and record of application dated 22.12.2021 again be consigned to the records.

                    

                                                                                      President,

                                                                                      DCDRC, YNR,

      L. Member.                                                 26.05.2022.

 

Typed by: Jitender Sharma, Steno.