U P S E B Vs. AYUB HUSSAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the Electricity Department against the order dated 9.12.1998 passed by the District Forum, Nainital whereby the complaint of the complainant was allowed.

(2.) THE complainant had a connection of electricity. The appellant temporarily disconnected it in August, 1994. However, there was permanent disconnection in August, 1995. It is settled principle of law that even after temporary disconnection, the consumer has to pay the charges and the surcharge till the date of permanent disconnection. The permanent disconnection was in August, 1995. The appellant, therefore, can claim the bills up to August, 1995 and not thereafter. However, the appellant has been making claim even after August, 1995 and they have submitted the bills worth Rs. 12,978.50. When a complaint was made to the appellant, the appellant corrected the bill and issued a fresh bill for a sum of Rs. 5,601.92.

(3.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant as well as the complainant and the learned Counsel for the complainant argued that this bill of Rs. 5,601.92ps. itself may be considered to be the real claim of the appellant but looking to this bill at item No. 4, a claim of Rs. 820/ - has been made regarding the material not removed. The cost of the said materials has been claimed to be Rs. 820/ -. It is specific case of the complainant that the appellant has removed all the materials and even if some material is lying on the spot, according to the complainant the appellant is free to remove those materials, he should not be compelled to pay charges for that. This argument of the learned Counsel for the complainant appears to be 100% correct. At item No. 5 disconnection charges have been claimed as Rs. 300/ -. Before making permanent disconnection, the Electricity Department charges the disconnection charges first and then makes the permanent disconnection. Without getting the disconnection charges, the Electricity Department never makes any permanent disconnection. It is admitted fact that on the application of the complainant as written at page 2 of the judgment, the permanent disconnection was done in August, 1995. The disconnection could not have been made without adequate deposit, therefore, the complainant is not bound to pay again the disconnection charges of Rs. 300/ -. Thus out of this amount, a sum of Rs. 1,120/ - is to be reduced. The learned Counsel for the complainant further argued that the complainant has deposited a sum of Rs. 500/ - as security, which should be adjusted. The learned Counsel for the appellant stated that he has got no objection in the adjustment of the said amount on proper application by the complainant. The complainant can get the said amount adjusted. In this way out of the claim of Rs. 5,601.92 after deducting Rs. 820/ - plus Rs. 300/ - plus Rs. 500/ -, the complainant should deposit a sum of Rs. 4,001.92, say Rs. 4,002/ - (Rupees four thousand two only). The appeal is to be disposed of in the light of the admissions and arguments of the learned Counsel of the parties and it is, therefore, directed that the appellant shall not claim any amount from the complainant after this deposit of Rs. 4,002/ -. The complainant should deposit this amount within a period of one month. On the deposit of this amount, the entire dispute between the parties shall stand settled and there shall not be claim of either of the parties against each other. In the circumstances as such, the order of payment of Rs. 2,000/ - as compensation and Rs. 500/ - as cost of litigation is hereby quashed. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.