PURAN CHAND vs B.S.E.S. YAMUNA POWER LIMITED

THE present appeal, filed by the appellant, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act''), is directed against order dated 29.4.2003, passed by District Forum (Central), I.S.B.T., Kashmere Gate, Delhi, in Complaint Case No. 1444/2001 entitled Mr. Puran Chand v. Delhi Vidyut Board and Another.

THE facts, relevant for the disposal of the above mentioned appeal, lie in a narrow compass. THE appelllant, Mr. Puran Chand, had filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Act before the District Forum alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. THE learned District Forum, placing reliance on a decision of this Commission in Appeal No. A-822/2002 entitled Mr. Vijay Kumar v. Delhi Vidyut Board, decided on 3.9.2002, has held that the complaint, filed by the appellant, was not maintainable before a redressal agency established under the Act and on the above ground had dismissed the complaint, filed by the appellant. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the present appeal under Section 15 of the Act.

Insofar as the above mentioned appeal, filed by the appellant, is concerned, we have heard the A/representative of the appellant at length on the question of admission of the present appeal and have also carefully gone through the documents/material on record. On the basis of documents/material on record it is not in dispute that a joint inspection of the premises in question was carried out by the functionaries of the respondents on 22.5.2001 and it was noticed that both the half seals and seal wire were found tampered with. On the basis of that Inspection Report a case of theft/FAE was booked against the appellant. Since the dispute, raised by the appellant before the District Forum in his complaint, which he had filed under Section 12 of the Act, related to ''Fraudulent Abstraction of Energy'', (theft), the same is covered by a decision of this Commission in Appeal No. A-3375/2000 entitled Delhi Vidyut Board v. D.N. Shukla and Ors., decided on 19th December, 2002, wherein this Commission has held in clearcut terms that FAE is not a ''consumer dispute'' and the complainant in such an eventuality is not a ''consumer'' under the Act. Therefore, for the detailed reasons, recorded in the aforesaid decision of this Commission, in Appeal No. A-3375/2000 entitled Delhi Vidyut Board v. Mr. D.N. Shukla and Ors., III (2003) CPJ 66, (copy of order dated 19th December, 2002 passed in the above said appeal annexed), the present appeal, filed by the appellant, merits dismissal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed in limine, with no order as to costs. However, the appellant is given the liberty to seek redressal of his grievances being raised by him in the present appeal before any other Forum/Civil Court, as he may be advised.

THE above mentioned appeal, filed by the appellant, stands disposed of in above terms. A copy of this order, as per the statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties, free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to Record Room. Appeal disposed of.