DELHI VIDYUT BOARD Vs. KRISHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal, filed by the appellant, under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), is directed against order dated 22.10.1999, passed by District Forum No.1 in Complaint Case No.1531/98 - entitled Shri Krishan Lal V/s. Delhi Vidyut Board.

(2.) The facts, relevant for the disposal of the present appeal, briefly stated, are that the respondent, who is having an electricity connection, in his name, had filed a complaint under Sec.12 of the Act before the District Forum, averring that in respect of his electricity connection, in May, 1991, he had received an inflated bill of Rs.52,239.25 and when he approached the office of the appellant, he was told either to pay the amount of the bill or to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- by way of illegal gratification. It was alleged that as the respondent was not in a position to pay either the amount of the bill or the amount of illegal gratification, demanded from him, his electricity connection, bearing K. No.1351575, was disconnected in September, 1995 and the meter was removed in January, 1996. It was stated, in the complaint, by the respondent Shri Krishan Lal that even after the disconnection of electricity and removal of the meter, the respondent, in November, 1996, in respect of the same connection, received another bill for Rs.1,11,006/- It was stated that the respondent approached 'bijlee Adalat' and was asked to pay only Rs.303.66 and was asked to apply for new connection, which, the respondent complied with on 20.4.1998 and was given a new connection in December, 1998. The grievance of the respondent, in the complaint, filed by him, before the District Forum, was that due to high handedness of the employees of the appellant, the respondent had to live without electricity for 3 years for no fault on his part. The respondent filed the complaint with the prayer that he be awarded compensation for the harassment caused to him.

(3.) The claim of the respondent, in the District Forum, was resisted by the appellant. The appellant, in the written statement/written version, while denying the allegations, took the stand that the respondent applied for restoration of dormant supply on 26.8.1998 and deposited the necessary charges for the restoration of electricity on 17.11.1998 and the connection was restored on 22.12.1998. It was stated that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the appellant. The learned District Forum, vide impugned order, has held the appellant guilty of deficiency in service and on the above ground, has directed the appellant, to pay to the respondent, a sum of Re.6,000/- as compensation; refund the security amount realised afresh from the respondent; and withdraw all bills issued after disconnection of electricity. The appellant has also been directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- to the respondent as cost of litigation. It has also been directed that the amount of Rs.7,000/- (Rs.6,000/- compensation + Rs.1,000/- costs) be recovered/ realised from the salary of the concerned defaulting officers/officials.