SDO OP HVPN Vs. PARDEEP KUMAR KHULLAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 13.11.1998 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Karnal in a Complaint No. 250 of 1998, whereby the complaint filed by the complainant -respondent was partly allowed against the appellant -opposite parties and following directions were given: 'As regards the security amount, O/P shall serve a revised bill for the same upon the complainant and give credit to the complainant for the amount deposited by him with O/P. The complainant has deposited a sum of Rs. 4,000 with O/P under the orders of the Forum. That amount shall be adjusted against the amount of current energy charges O/P shall serve a fresh bill upon the complainant as per the orders above.'

(2.) THE facts as can be gathered from the record are that Dr. Pardeep Kumar Khullar in the partnership of Sh. Vinod Kumar and one other partner Sh. Sunil Kumar Bedi had been running a diagnostic centre located in the Urban Estate, 13 Extension, Karnal. The electricity connection was installed in the premises in the name of Shri Vinod Kumar. Later on, Sh. Vinod Kumar and Sh. Sunil Kumar partners left the partnership business and Dr. Pardeep Kumar complainant became the sole proprietor of the firm. However, the electricity connection bearing No. LS -30/0207 F -E, continued to be in the name of Sh. Vinod Kumar. The complainant had been receiving the energy consumption bills. For the period 1.11.1997 to 1.1.1998, the bill for the consumption of 2023 units for the amount of Rs. 14,471 was received by the complainant. According to the complainant this amount included a sum of Rs. 6,498.45 as charges for electricity consumption consumed and Rs. 7,350 as penalty. The grievance of the complainant is that earlier he had been getting the bill for around Rs. 2,000 per two months, whereas the amount claimed in the bill is not only excessive but totally unjustified. Alleging deficiency of service at the part of the appellant, the complainant sought directions against the opposite parties to charge energy consumption bill on average basis. Terming the demand of the bill made, as illegal and arbitrary, the complainant has filed the present complaint seeking direction against the appellant, to the opposite parties for correction of the bill in accordance with the previous bills and further restraining the opposite parties not to disconnect the electricity connection of the complainant.

(3.) THE District Forum on appraisal of the pleadings of the parties and evidence adduced on record, accepted the complaint and issued directions noticed in the earlier part of the order dated 13.11.1998. It is against this order, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant.