PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. HARI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the Punjab State Electricity Board, challenging order of District Forum, Sangrur dated September 18, 1996 wherein direction was given to the Board to refund a sum of Rs.6,850/- with 18% p. a. interest along with Rs.4,000/- compensation for causing harassment and a sum of Rs.500/- litigation expenses to Hari Ram, the complainant.

(2.) Hari Ram being a consumer of electricity Account No.18377 applied for electric connection for 3 B. H. P. for the purpose of irrigation on July 3,1990 along with a sum of Rs.1,000/- to the Board. He was to deposit a sum of Rs.10,850/- as connection charges for the wire, which was stated to be @ Rs.50/- per metre. It was on May 25,1994 that the connection was provided from a distance of only 40 metres from the line. The complainant was over charged and he wanted refund of Rs.9,000/- for which application was moved on September 19,1994. Thereafter in October, 1994, legal notice was issued and ultimately the complaint was filed. The Board contested the complaint. However, broad facts were amputated. Stand was taken that when Rs.10,850/- were got deposited, on receipt of the test report, effort was made to grant the connection from HT line. However, in the meantime, work of improvement of LD system started and the transformer became under-loaded that the complainant was sanctioned connection there from. It was denied that there was inordinate delay in granting the connection. Reference was made to Circular No.59 of 1994 that no amount was refundable. Hari Ram filed his own affidavit; Annexure C1and documents Annexures C2 to C11. On the other hand, the opposite parties relied upon the documents Annexures R1 to R7. But no affidavit on behalf of the opposite party was filed. On the material aforesaid, the impugned order was passed.

(3.) The fact that Rs.6,850/- is due to the complainant as per demands made by officers of the Board in different letters produced by the complainant is not in dispute. Thus, it is not considered necessary as to whether the demand made was against the instructions issued by the Board or not, more so, when no appeal has been filed by the complainant.