DELHI VIDYUT BOARD Vs. K K NARULA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act'), against order dated 13.4.2000 passed by District Forum (East), Saini Enclave, Delhi in Complaint Case No.174/1999 entitled Sh. K. K. Narula V/s. Delhi Vidyut Board. By the impugned order the learned District Forum allowed the complaint of the respondent Sh. K. K. Narula and directed the appellant to remove the misuse charges from 19.1.1995 and revise the bill of the respondent without any misuse surcharges and late payment. The learned District Forum also directed the appellant to pay Rs.1,000/- as compensation and Rs.500/- as cost of litigation.

(2.) Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the appellant, Delhi Vidyut Board has filed the present appeal.

(3.) The brief facts of the case, relevant for the disposal of this appeal are as follows : the respondent Sh. K. K. Narula is the consumer of the appellant and electric connection No.601-1464989/r 403 is installed at his premises. The appellant sent a bill of electricity dues in September, 1998 for Rs.18,193,38/- that bill included misuse charges also which were levied on the basis of the report of the Meter Reader dated 10.1.1995. The respondent filed a complaint before the District Forum challenging the levy of misuse charges without issuing any notice to the respondent and without giving any opportunity of hearing. The respondent also challenged the levy of misuse six months prior to the alleged report of Meter Reader dated 19.1.1995. The appellant DVB cotested the claim of the respondent on the ground that as per report of the Meter Reader the domestic connection was found being used in the Chemist shop. A notice is also alleged to have been sent to the consumer on 6.7.1995 and when no reply was filed by the consumer, misuse charges were levied six months prior to the report of the Meter Reader. It also appears that the respondent had two connections, one was for domestic use and the other was for commercial use in the shop. Connection No.146498 was being used for domestic purpose while another connection No.150467 was being used at the shop. The second connection was started on 6.10.1996 and hence misuse charges were removed from 6.10.1996. The appellant's case before the District Forum was that the consumer was liable to pay the misuse charges from 19.1.1995 to 6.10.1996 when the misuse charges were recovered.