LAWS(NCD)-2003-7-311

P S TOMAR Vs. KIRAN DUDEJA

Decided On July 17, 2003
P S Tomar Appellant
V/S
KIRAN DUDEJA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of an order of District Forum, Nand Nagri, Delhi, dated 24.5.2000 passed in Complaint case No.347/1998 entitled Smt. Kiran Dudeja V/s. Delhi Vidyut Board.

(2.) Briefly stated the relevant facts are that the respondent No.1, Smt. Kiran Dudeja filed a complaint under Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), averring therein that the respondent No.1 was the consumer of electricity connection bearing No.614-12299105 since November, 1997. However, the meter in respect of the said connection got burnt and as such the respondent No.1 had applied for change of the same as well as, for the supply of electricity which had also been disconnected on account of the burning of the meter in question. Despite various efforts and visits of the concerned officials of the appellant, neither the meter in question was replaced nor the supply of electricity was resumed. It was stated that the respondent No.1 had also deposited Rs.20,000/- with the appellant on 2.12.1997 together with application for change of the burnt meter. Furthermore again on 11.12.1997, the respondent No.1 had approached the Nand Nagri Zone of the appellant with the request for changing the meter. In spite of no-objection of Mr. O. P. Rajput, Inspector (MTD), who had reported that the meter had been inspected and could be replaced, as well as, the orders of the concerned Superintending Engineer, Mr. A. K. Garg for the change of the burnt meter. Mr. P. S. Tomar failed to do the needful. As such respondent No.1 filed a complaint before the District Forum, Nand Nagri for the redressal of her grievances.

(3.) Respondent No.2, Delhi Vidyut Board, in its reply/written version filed before the District Forum denied the averments made by the respondent No.1 in her complaint and stated that the supply of electricity to the premises of the respondent No.1 had been resumed from 22.5.1998 after the change of meter and as such there was no deficiency in service on the part of respondent/dvb.