MOHAMMAD HASEEB AHMAD Vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As per the averments made in the Complaint, complainant/petitioner was given electricity connection by the respondent-Board for running a stone crusher in the year 1994. It is stated that the petitioner started the stone crusher in the year 1995 and regularly paid the electricity bills till 2003. Petitioner received a bill from the respondent which was sent without proper reading/ record of the meter. Being suspicious, petitioner lodged an oral complaint with the Electricity Authorities but in vain. Thereafter, petitioner lodged a complaint with the Authorities in the year 2004 stating that the electric line was not working but the concerned Electricity Authorities, on 22.2.2004, replaced the non-functional meter of the petitioner in his absence and lodged a complaint with the Police stating, inter alia, that the petitioner was indulging in theft of electricity for the past 3 years. Petitioner received a bill of Rs. 4,63,332 on 25.2.2004, which was not paid. Due to non-payment, the electricity supply of the petitioner was disconnected without prior notice. Being aggrieved, petitioner filed the Complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Parbhani and Hingoli (for short the District Forum ).

(2.) On being served, respondent-Board filed its Written Statement stating that the petitioner is not a consumer under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the Act ) as the electricity connection had been taken for commercial purpose, i.e., for running a stone crushing machine. That the complainant was stealing the electricity and the criminal proceedings were still pending and, therefore, the Consumer Forum was not competent to try the Complaint. That the electricity connection was disconnected due to non-payment of the bill which had been issued to the complainant. Thus, denying the allegations made in the Complaint, it was prayed that the Complaint be dismissed.

(3.) District Forum, after taking into consideration, the pleadings as well as the evidence led by the parties, dismissed the Complaint.