HARADHAN HAZRA Vs. HARADHAN HAZRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -both the appeals are similar in nature and so a similar judgment will serve the purpose of both the appeals. The case of the appellant in brief is stated herein. The appellant is a bona fide consumer of electricity under the CESC Ltd. He has two electrical meters and has been paying electricity bills regularly as raised by the respondent No.1. There was no allegation of dishonest effort on this part and there was never any inquiry from the side of the CESC Ltd. But one day in his absence, some persons claiming themselves to be employees of the CESC, disconnected his service line. Afterwards he visited the office of the respondent No.1 and tried to ascertain the reason of such disconnection, but did not get any reply from that office. On 8.9.2000 he received a letter from the CESC Ltd. dated 1.9.2000, stating some false and concocted version. Thereafter, the respondents sent three bills dated 19.9.2000 claiming certain amounts which wee absolutely unjustified, false, arbitrary and illegal. Learned Counsel for the appellant states that he never committed any act which was against the law of electricity and never committed any theft of energy. But the respondents with a view to extract money from him illegally and fraudulently raised the bills which have no basis at all and he is not liable to pay the same. Due to disconnection of electricity his business has been totally closed and he has been suffering pecuniary loss everyday. For this reason he filed a case before the Forum claiming for a sum of Rs.80,000/- by way of compensation and prayed for a declaration that the bills were raised illegally and arbitrarily and he is not bound to pay the same.

(2.) The Forum in its judgment dated 26.8.2002, held that the appellant may approach a competent Civil Court in a civil suit for redressal of his grievances and dismissed the complaint.

(3.) Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment the appellant has preferred the appeal before this commission. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that Forum below had committed serious mistake in passing the judgment in deviation with the earlier judgment dated 12.2.2002. On the whole the impugned judgment is against the spirit and object of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 . In his opinion the judgment of the Forum below is erroneous, illegal and liable to be dismissed.