Date of Filing:13.08.2009<br /> Date of Order:18.01.2010<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2010<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1966 OF 2009 <br /> <br /> <br /> G. Balakrishna,<br /> S/o Late Govindappa,<br /> R/a # 988, Basavanagar,<br /> M.S. Palya, Bannerghatta Main road,<br /> Geedimarg, Bangalore 560 076. Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> 1. The Chief Engineer,<br /> BESCOM Ltd.,<br /> K.R. Circle, Bangalore-560001.<br /> <br /> 2. The Asst. Executive Engineer,<br /> S-6 Sub-Division, BESCOM,<br /> J.P. Nagar, 6th Phase,<br /> Bangalore-560 078. Opposite Parties<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to direct the opposite parties to restore power supply and to affix the meter and damages of Rs.50,000/-. <br /> The brief facts of the case are that the complainant is a customer under the opposite party. During the month of April 2008 the complainant intended to have the facility of the electricity to his premises and approached opposite party No.2 and enquired about the procedure. After sanctioning the power supply to the residence of the complainant the opposite party has executed an agreement on 23/04/2008. The opposite party requested to arrange a new meter at his own cost. The complainant procured a new meter from the authorized shop of the opposite party, by paying Rs.836/-. The said meter was tested by the opposite party and gave a certificate about the accuracy and its functioning vide certificate dated 09/05/2008. During the month of August 2008 the opposite party wrote a letter to deposit a sum of Rs.4000/- for incidental charges. The complainant paid the said sum on 05/11/2008. The complainant since from November 2008 is regularly paying the electricity bill on the consumption of the power as demanded by the opposite party and has paid the bills even to this day without any default or late payment in respect of RR No.6S39910. On 06/03/2009 the opposite party No.2 came to the premises of the complainant and disconnected the power supply and has taken away the meter from the premises without any notice or intimation. The complainant approached the opposite party number of times and requested to reconnect and restore the power supply to his premises. But the opposite party never gave satisfactory reply or they told why they have disconnected the power supply. The complainant got issued legal notice to the illegal act of the opposite party through advocate on 14/07/2009. Opposite party No.2 replied by a letter dated 27/07/2009 stating that due to some order passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka they have disconnected the power supply. The opposite parties have no right to disconnect when the bills were paid, and have collected the amount and have raised the bill even after disconnecting the power supply to the residence of the complainant. Hence the opposite parties have failed to serve the consumer and there is deficiency of service. Hence, the complaint. <br /> 2. Notices were issued to opposite parties. Notices were served. Opposite parties appeared through and advocate and filed defence version stating that, the power supply arranged in the name of complainant was illegal since his principal was the owner of the land and he had not given any permission for according power supply. The High Court had granted an interim order of Status quo much before the supply was sanctioned. In the light of objection raised, a notice dated 19/02/2009 was sent to the complainant informing him of the objections received by BESCOM and he was called upon to produce the original documents of title pertaining to the premises within seven days, failing which the power supply would be disconnected. The notice was issued in view of the fact that the regulations stipulate that an applicant desirous of availing electricity supply are required to provide proof of ownership or proof of occupancy and since there was a rival claim being raised, it was found that the proof of the complainant’s ownership was required to be examined in detail. In response to the notice the complainant did not produce any documents pertaining to his premises though the opposite parties waited for more than 15 days. Hence, on 06/03/2009 the electricity supply was disconnected and the meter was also removed by the opposite parties. It is submitted that the disconnection of power supply was not solely due to the interim order passed by the High Court and the disconnection was mainly due to the fact that the complainant did not produce documents to prove his ownership despite issuance of a notice. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and the opposite parties requested to dismiss the complaint. <br /> <br /> 3. Affidavit evidence and documents are filed. Perused the pleadings, affidavit and the documents. Arguments are heard.<br /> <br /> 4. The points for consideration are:-<br /> <br /> 1. Whether the complainant has proved deficiency <br /> in service on the part of the opposite parties?<br /> <br /> <br /> 2. Whether the complainant is entitled for reconnection of the power to his premises?<br /> <br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 5. It is an admitted case of the parties that the opposite party has sanctioned the power to the premises of the complainant on 23/04/2008 and accordingly the parties have executed agreement on the same day. The opposite party requested the complainant to purchase his own meter at his cost. As per the instruction of the opposite party complainant purchased new meter from the authorized shop by paying Rs.836/-. The meter was tested by the opposite party and to that effect certificate of accuracy has been issued on 09/05/2008. The complainant has produced the meter purchased bill and also test certificate of opposite party. The complainant has produced power sanctioned letter of opposite party. The complainant has also produced official memorandum dated 23/04/2008 wherein in response of the application of complainant the opposite party has accorded to service the installation and supply the electricity to the premises/building of complainant. The complainant has also produced receipt No.1308 dated 05/11/2008 which goes to show that he has deposited Rs.4,000/- with the opposite party for getting electricity. The opposite party has clearly admitted receipt of the deposit of Rs.4,000/-. The opposite party has also admitted in the version that power supply was arranged on 17/11/2008 vide RR No. 6S-39910 after collecting necessary deposits. When this is the admitted facts of the case it is very surprising and unfortunate on the part of the opposite party that the electric supply was disconnected suddenly without issuing notice to the complainant. The complainant has stated in his affidavit and also in the complaint that on 06/03/2009 opposite party No.2 came to the premises of the complainant and disconnected the power and taken away the meter without any notice or intimation. This type of action or steps on the part of the opposite party is really unfortunate and illegal. The complainant has produced electricity bills and he was all along regular in paying the monthly bills. Even it is not the case of the opposite party that the complainant is not regular in payment of monthly bills. It is again very strange on the part of the opposite party to issue electricity bills to the complainant even after disconnecting the power supply. The complainant has produced bills and the receipts to show that he has paid the amount even after disconnection of the power supply. The only reason given by the opposite party for disconnection of electricity to the premises of complainant is that one Zaheer Ahammed submitted a representation to the opposite party stating that power supply in the name of G. Balakrishna was illegal and he requested for disconnection of the power supply. It is highly objectionable and unfortunate on the part of the opposite party to act on the representation of Mr.Zaheer Ahammed without there being any legal basis. The question of ownership of property does not arise in this case. Owner ship of the premises or building is immaterial. The opposite party is nothing to do with the ownership of the building and the dispute. The ownership issue requires to be decided or settled before the Civil Court. The fact remains that the opposite party had accepted deposit and given power supply to the complainant’s premises after going through all the procedures and suddenly without any notice or reasons the electricity supply was disconnected thereby and great hardship and inconvenience had been caused to the complainant. Admittedly the complainant being an occupier of the premises and he had applied for the electric connection to his premises. The opposite party accepted the deposit of Rs.4,000/- and after going through all the formalities had given power supply to the premises of complainant and issued monthly bills of the consumption of power. The complainant is regular in giving monthly bills. So under these circumstances, there is no legal authority or any direction from the Court or High Court to the opposite party to disconnect the power supply. If at all Mr. Zaheer Ahammed had given representation to the opposite party, his representation cannot be considered by the opposite party. The opposite party could have asked Mr. Zaheer Ahammed to go to the Civil Court for settling the issue. Admittedly no order has been passed against the complainant or opposite party by any authority directing the opposite party to disconnect the power supply to the premises of the complainant. So under these circumstances, the disconnection of power supply to the premises of the complainant by the opposite party is highly illegal and it is not sustainable in law. The opposite party being a service provider has committed deficiency in service. Therefore, the complainant is definitely entitled relief from the hands of this Fora. Consumer Protection Act is a social and benevolent legislation intended to protect better interest of the consumers and the complainant is being a consumer in this case, his interest deserves to be protected by giving direction to the opposite party. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:-<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 6. The complaint is allowed. The opposite parties are directed to restore the power supply to the premises of the complainant and install the meter that was removed from the said premises immediately. <br /> <br /> 7. The complainant is entitled Rs.1,000/- as cost of the present proceedings from the opposite party. <br /> <br /> 8. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> <br /> 9. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2010. <br /> <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings. <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER <br /> rhr. <br />