MIHIR KR DUTTA Vs. BIKASH R DUTTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide order dated 20.11.1999 the Forum directed the present appellant who was the opposite party before it to make refund of Rs.12,580/- to the complainants within a period of thirty days from the date of the order. Besides, the Forum awarded cost of Rs.2,000/- in favour of the complainants.

(2.) Being aggrieved by the order the opposite party has appealed. The present appellant sold the flat to the complainants which is contiguous to his flat. By virtue of an agreement between the parties the complainants made payment of a total a sum of Rs.22,100/- towards charges for consumption of electricity for the period from June, 1997 to September, 1997. The complainants had no separate electric connection in their flat during the aforesaid period. So they drew electric energy through the meter of the opposite party. According to the complainants the parties agreed that the actual consumption charges of electricity consumed by the complainant would be adjusted against the said sum of Rs.22,100/- which was paid in advance. The parties however agreed that in case the amount of consumption falls short of the aforesaid advance, the balance would be refunded by the opposite party to the complainant. According to the complainants a sum of Rs.12,580/- fell due to them after adjustment of electric charges for the energy consumed by them. The opposite party having not made the refund, the complainants approached the Forum. It appears that the opposite party did not enter appearance before the Forum and so the Forum determined the case ex-parte and by the impugned order passed directions as aforesaid. It had been contended by the appellant that the complainants do not come under the definition of 'consumer' and as such they are not entitled to bring this action under the Consumer Protection Act. It is submitted on his behalf that the present dispute falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Civil Court inasmuch as a lot of accounting is required to be done. According to the appellant this is purely a suit for accounts and the Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction to adjudiate it. The appellant submits that he had been suffering from heart disease for long and he is practically bed-ridden and he alleges that taking advance of the situation the complainants have obtained ex-parte order against him much to his disadvantage.

(3.) We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and think that this is purely a suit for accounts. A lot of evidence is required to be examined and analysed before passing a decree in favour of the complainants. It appears from the pleadings of the complainants that they have not purchased electricity from the opposite party nor did they hire the services of the opposite party. What they did is that they drew electric energy from the meter of the opposite party for a certain period and by virtue of an agreement they had made advance payment of Rs.22,100/-. It appears that the opposite party having not entered appearance the Forum considered the affidavits filed by the complainants to come to the conclusion that a sum of Rs.12,580/- was due to the complainants. We think that the Forum was not justified in decreeing the claim but it ought to have referred the complainants to the Civil Court for appropriate relief. In that view of the matter we think that the case has not been rightly decided by the Forum which needs interference. Accordingly the appeal be allowed and the impugned judgment be set aside with a direction to the complainants to seek remedy before Civil Court, if so advised.