ASHOK KUMAR Vs. PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the complainant against the order of the District Forum dated 26.4.2005. The prayer made in the appeal is that the demand raised by the respondent should have been quashed by the District Forum and further the amount of compensation as awarded should be enhanced.

(2.) DE hors of any detailed facts, suffice it to mention, that the sanctioned load at the premises of the complainant prior to November, 1996 was 5 K.W. which had been enhanced to 12.3 K.W. in November, 1996. However, checking was done by the P.S.E.B. officials on 26.9.2003 and it was found that the load was of 8.300 K.W. Some demand was raised on the basis that against the sanctioned load of 5 K.W. the complainant was using 8.3 K.W. This demand was in the sum of Rs. 11,750. The case of the complainant was that he had from November, 1996 got the sanctioned load enhanced and the question of using more load in September, 2003 did not arise as 8.3 K.W. was muchless than sanctioned load of 12.3 K.W. His grievance having not been redressed by the P.S.E.B. he filed Complaint No. 191 of 2004 before the District Forum. The District Forum by an order in Complaint No. 191 of 2004 quashed the demand of Rs. 11,750. Rs. 3,000 was also awarded as compensation to the complainant. The Electricity Board did not challenge that order before this Commission. Another demand of Rs. 65,575 was raised against the complainant on 15.2.2004 on the basis that with effect from 11/96 the bills which had been raised against the complainant were on the basis as if sanctioned load was 5 K.W. and not on the basis of enhanced sanctioned load of 12.3 K.W. The demand was raised by calculating the difference in the bills which were raised as if the sanctioned load was 5 K.W. whereas it should have been on the basis of 12.3 K.W. It may be observed here that the demand which had been raised earlier which was subject matter of complaint No. 191 of 2004 before the District Forum i.e., Rs. 11,750, had in fact been paid by the complainant before it was quashed by the order dated 26.4.2005. After the impugned judgment dated 26.4.2005 the credit of the amount deposited by the complainant i.e., Rs. 11,750 as also the compensation awarded by the District Forum in Complaint No. 191 of 2004 as also compensation which has been awarded by the District Forum in this case vide impugned order has been adjusted for and a revised demand of Rs. 43,825 was raised against the complainant on 19.8.2005.

(3.) IT may be observed here that the complainant challenged the demand of Rs. 65,575 before the District Forum by filing Complaint No. 504 of 2004 which was decided by the District Forum by the impugned order on 26.4.2005. The demand of Rs. 65,575 was upheld but for not raising bill on time on the due dates, Rs. 7,000 was awarded as compensation. The P.S.E.B. did not challenge the award of compensation by filing the appeal etc. before this Commission. It is under these circumstances that out of the demand of Rs. 65,575 the adjustment of Rs. 11,750 which demand had been quashed in Complaint No. 191 of 2004 as also the compensation awarded in that case, and Rs. 7,000 compensation awarded in this case has been adjusted and a fresh demand of Rs. 43,825 was issued on 19.8.2005.