R.N. TRIVEDI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against impugned order dated 29-11-2007 passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 913/03 R.N. Trivedi Vs. State of U.P. & Ors., by which while allowing appeal, order of the District Forum allowing complaint was set aside.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that complainant/petitioner was provided electricity connection no. 6726/KESA/C -306 (T/W) on 09-04-1991 for the tube well which was situated at Plot No. 100 at Village Rooma, Block & Tehsil Kanpur by opposite party/respondent. Complainant used to pay Rs.250/- per month @ Rs.50/- per horse power per month for the electricity meter for 5 horse power and Rs.15/- per month for the light and fan. Opposite party vide bill dated 11.12.1999 for the period from 15.07.1994 to 30.11.1999 demanded Rs.1,93,179/- for 56438 units, which is illegal. On 11-03-2000 his power connection of tube well was disconnected and opposite party sent bill dated 10.01.2001 for Rs.2,63,806/- on the basis of 725 units from 30.11.2000 to 31.12.2000 whereas in the bill last reading was shown as zero. It was further alleged that in this bill electricity duty was shown as Rs.6,525/- whereas no electricity was used since 11.03.2000 as supply was disconnected. Alleging deficiency on the party of opposite party, complainant filed complaint for restoration of electric supply after receiving dues from 01.11.1993 to 11.03.2000 @ Rs.265/- per month. Opposite party did not appear and was proceeded ex-parte. Learned District Forum after hearing complainant allowed complaint and quashed bill dated 11.12.1999, 10.01.2001 and demand notice dated 25.0.2002 for Rs.4,21,138/- and directed opposite party to restore connection on payment of bills due @ Rs.265/- per month and further allowed compensation of Rs.20,000/- and Rs.1,000/- as cost. Appeal filed by opposite party was allowed by learned State Commission vide impugned order against which this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused record.