PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. SURINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants has filed appeal against the order dated 12.8.2003 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Nawanshahar.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the appellants issued notice dated 29.10.2002 and 15.11.2002 to the respondent/complainant (in short ˜the complainant) for the recovery of Rs. 22,500 against the electricity A/c No. JD 307 which was in the name of respondent. The respondent filed the reply of the said notices to the appellants/opposite party (in short ˜the appellants) on 3.12.2002 but the demand was not withdrawn by the appellant. The respondent had alleged in the complaint that he is regularly paying the bills and other charges of the appellants for the electric connection, which was in his name and nothing was due against him.

(3.) THE appellants filed their reply before the learned District Forum and pleaded that the complaint is barred by his act and conduct, the complainant cannot take the advantage of his own wrong committed by him, and the suit is pending in the Civil Court, which has not been finally disposed of. It was also pleaded by the appellants that there was a dispute between the respondent and one Bakshish Singh regarding the shifting of tube -well electric connection No. JD180, which was in the name of Bakshish Singh and was installed in the joint land of the respondent and Bakshish Singh. Bakshish Singh wants to shift the same in his field and the respondent filed a Civil Suit for permanent injunction for not shifting of the same and succeeded in obtaining an interim injunction in that case, which was vacated by the Ld. Trial Court on 6.9.2002. After the vacation of the interim injunction order, the said aforesaid tube -well connection was shifted to some other place on 9.9.2002 at the instance of Bakshish Singh and the respondent was aware of the shifting of that connection No. JD180. It is also pleaded that after the shifting of the tube -well connection No. JD180, the respondent suo mottu and illegally connected the new bore by placing the PVC cable at the new place as the earlier place of bore was not in working condition. When this fact came to the knowledge of the appellants the officials of the P.S.E.B. inspected the spot on 28.10.2002 at about 10.30 a.m. and found an illegal tube -well connection in working condition, which was disconnected at the spot as the respondent committing theft of energy. A notice dated 29.10.02 for Rs.7,500 was served upon the respondent to pay the same as theft charges. It was also pleaded that on 12.11.2002 again the fields of the respondent was inspected and he again found committing theft of energy and as such he was liable to pay an another amount of Rs. 15,000 and notice No. 2244 dated 15.11.2002 was issued, which was exhibited as Ex. R6 by the appellants.