VIDYA DEVI vs PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

THIS appeal has been directed by the complainant against order dated 12.10.2001 passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Patiala (hereinafter to be referred as District Consumer Forum), vide which her complaint was dismissed and the parties were left to bear their own costs.

BRIEFLY stated the facts are that Chajju Ram (now deceased) husband of the complainant (appellant) Vidya Devi was electricity consumer against A/c No. SP-44-0060 situated in village Gajewas Chatehra for running a flour mill. After the death of her husband, Smt.Vidya Devi used to run the mill for her livelihood but she could not pay the bill in time on account of financial problem. On 7.3.2001 the meter was removed. The bill of Rs. 16,470 dated 29.3.2001 payable by 5.4.2001 was issued but appellant could not pay the bill and approached the respondent for permitting the payment of the bill in instalments and further that the meter had been removed before due date and also requested to deposit the bill without penalty and to instal the electricity meter. The respondent contested the complaint and stated that the appellant had defaulted in paying the bills for the months of July, August, September, 2000 in time and also did not make full payment of the bills up to December, 2000 and as such termination order for disconnection was issued for non- payment of amount of Rs. 7,567 of January,2001 on 18.1.2001 and was actually affected on 5.3.2001. When the meter was removed, then meter seals were found missing and the meter removed was bearing No. 193377 whereas the Board had installed meter No. 203895 at the premises of appellant and thus the appellant had installed another meter without the permission of respondent and was found committing theft of energy and as such payment was raised to Rs.17,528.

Parties adduced their evidence by way of affidavits.

WE have heard Counsel for appellant Mr. R.K. Shukla, Mr. Surmukh Singh, advocate proxy for Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate for respondent and carefully gone through the file. It is not disputed that the appellant had not been able to pay the bills in time on account of financial problem and the meter was removed on 7.3.2001 when the last bill of Rs. 16,470 was payable by 5.4.2001. Respondent was justified in removing the meter because permanent disconnection order was issued in the month of January, 2001 as the appellant had failed to pay Rs. 7,567 upto December, 2001 but actual permanent disconnection was affected on 5.3.2001. It is also in evidence that Junior Engineer went to spot for disconnection and to remove the meter Ex. R.3 then it was found to have different number bearing No.193377 instead actual meter No. 230895 which was issued to the appellant. The appellant had refused to sign the permanent disconnection order. Further the appellant had changed the meter without the permission of respondent and had installed the new meter without carrying any seals. Thus, the respondent was fully justified in raising the demand of electricity bill in question and also to affect permanent disconnection because the earlier bills were not paid and was found committing theft of electricity. We do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.

WE concur with the reasoning given by the District Consumer Forum and hold that there is no force in the appeal. Consequently it is dismissed. Copies of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. Appeal dismissed.