RAJASTHAN STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD vs HIRA LAL

THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 29.4.91 by which the District Forum, Jodhpur passed an interim direction to the opposite parties not to disconnect the electric connection of the complainant on the ground of the arrears of bills. The complaint has not been finally disposed of by the District Forum as yet. Facts leading to this appeal lie in a very narrow compass. The complaint was filed against the RSEB through its Chairman, AEN (Vigilance) Jodhpur and AEN, Borunda, RSEB. They were arrayed as opposite parties No. 1 to 3 in the complaint. The complainant has alleged that he is consumer of Account No. 1/236 and no amount is outstanding against him. It was further alleged that on 15.3.91 at 5 p.m. opposite party No. 1 told him either to pay Rs. 67,500/- as per the bill else his supply will be discontinued. Opposite Party No. 2 further told him not to enter into a litigation and give so in writing stating so. The complainant further stated that it was night time and the complainant wanted to retain his electric connection, so he signed the document. According to the complainant this action on the part of opposite party No. 2 was wholly wrong. He, therefore, sent the complaint by post which was received by the District Forum on 19.3.91 praying that the bill relating to Rs. 67,500/- may be quashed and claimed Rs. 10,000/- as compensation.

THE case of the opposite parties was that the complainant had committed a theft of electricity by stopping meter which was checked on the spot by opposite party No. 2. THE complainant made request to opposite party No. 2 for compounding the electricity theft. On the request of the complainant opposite party No. 2 agreed to compound the electricity theft on the conditions laid down by RSEB and agreed to by him. For this purpose, the document was signed by the complainant agreeing to pay Rs. 67,500/-. THE complainant did not pay the amount. In order to save himself from the consequences resulting from the writing, he filed the complaint which according to the opposite parties is a false complaint. During the pendency of the complaint the complainant submitted an application stating that the appellant has revised the amount of the bill and by issuing a supplementary bill the opposite parties demanded Rs,. 1,12,500/- from the complainant- respondent. That notice has been produced and marked as Annexure 2, in this appeal. The complainant submitted an interim application. In that application a prayer was made by the complainant that an interim order may be passed against the opposite parties restraining them from realizing the amount of the appeal. A mention was made in the application that he has already deposited a sum of Rs. 7,500/- under protest with the Department in connection with the bill for Rs. 67,500/-. On this application the impugned order dated 29.4.91 was passed. At the same time the District Forum ordered for the issuance of the notices to the opposite parties. Aggrieved this appeal has been filed.

Even if this is not an order under Sec. 14(1) of the Act and further that as appeal is not maintainable, it can be treated as a revision. It may be disposed of as such. A ground has been specifically taken in the memo of appeal that the District Forum had no jurisdiction to pass the stay order in the shape of injunction under the Act for there is absolutely no provision for passing the order. It was also submitted that a Redressal Forum can only pass those orders which are enumerated in Sec. 14(1) of the Act and not beyond that. The present order does not fall within the category of the orders so specified. In the memo of appeal an objection was also taken that the case of the complainant as mentioned in para 2 of the complaint is that it was on account of malice in order, to collect money he was compeled to sign the document and so fraud was perpetrated upon him.

ACCORDING to the opposite parties-appellants when the pleas of fraud and undue influence have been taken, it does not fall within the definition of the deficiency in service rendered by the opposite parties. We do not consider it proper to express any finding on the questions raised on behalf of the appellants for the simple reason that the complaint is still pending adjudication before the District Forum. We shall base our decision whether on the basis of the averments made in the complaint and the reply the District Forum has exercised its jurisdiction as vested in it by law by making the direction which it did. We have held in some cases that interim order in the shape of injunction cannot be granted. The provisions of Order 39 CPC are not applicable. The complainant himself has come with the case that a demand of Rs. 67,500/- may be cancelled and according to him the document was obtained by perpetrating fraud upon him. To use the word used in para 2 - "DHAN SANGHRAH KARNE KI BADNIYAT SE YAH PENALTY LAGAKAR PRARTHY KO DARA DHAMKAKAR TANG KIYA GAYA HAI The interim injunction in the manner in which it has been granted could not be issued and/ in any case the interest of the opposite parties is required to be safeguarded in respect of the payment of the amount which the District Forum failed to consider. A perusal of the order-sheet dated 29.4.91 shows that after passing the order, the District Forum ordered that served notice may be produced. The complaint is pending for filing the version of the case. As the District Forum has exercised its jurisdiction not vested in it by law and also legally and with material irregularity, the order under challenge cannot be sustained. It is, therefore, set aside. This will not however preclude the District Forum, Jodhpur to pass any appropriate order which it may deem fit to pass and nothing said here in above by us will prejudicially affect the rights of any of the parties.

THE result is that this appeal, which we are disposing of as a revision succeeds and the order dated 29.4.91 is set aside. THEre will be no order as to costs. THE District Forum, Jodhpur shall dispose of the complaint as expeditiously as possible. Revision allowed. ______________