Decided on March 22,2007

Kaptan Pal Singh Appellant
U P Power Corporation Limited Respondents


- (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the appellant as well as learned Counsel for the UPPCL. The appellant Kaptan Pal Singh is aggrieved of the District Consumer Forum's orders dated 9.1.2007 and 29.9.2006. By virtue of the order of 29.9.2006 the District Consumer Forum has directed the UPPCL to send the bill to the appellant for payment. Subsequently vide order of 9.1.2007 the District Consumer Forum issued a recovery certificate for Rs. 47,979 to be recovered as arreares of land revenue. In short the factual matrix of this litigation may be narrated as follows:
(2.) THE authorities of the UPPCL raided the appellant's premises on 15.2.1990 and lodged an F.I.R. with the allegations that the consumption of the electricity was being made in an unauthorized manner which amounted to theft. A complaint case was filed against the appellant whereupon he was put on trial and charged. However, the said criminal proceedings terminated in the appellant's acquittal on the charge of theft. Though the appellant was exonerated yet the troubles, he had come across, were not over. His supply having been disconnected on 15.2.1990 was not restored during the next six months nor it was permanently disconnected as required under Clause 4.38(b) of the U.P. Electricity Supply Code, 2005. It is notworthy that the power supply is yet to be restored to the appellant's premises. During this long period of 16 years the appellant had to undergo a prolonged litigation. He filed his complaint on 1.1.2001 before the District Consumer Forum which had partialy allowed his complaint and directed the UPPCL, vide its judgment of 8.10.2003 to restore the power connection, of course with a rider that the complainant would be liable to pay the minimum charges as prescribed.
(3.) NEITHER of the two parties complied with the said order. When the execution proceedings were pressed into service the District Consumer Forum by means of the two impugned order directed the appellant to pay the arrears of Rs. 47,979. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted with reference to the provisions of Clause 6.15(b) of the U.P. Electricity Supply Code, 2005 that the UPPCL would be incomeptent to recover from the appellant the arrears on the expiry of two years from the date when such sum has become due. Supplementing his argument the learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the bill for Rs. 47,979 was demanded as arrears of minimum charges during the pendency of the execution proceedings and that too by way of raising one bill only. In other words, it is argued that neither these charges were shown as arrears recoverable from the appellant nor any demand at regular interval had been made. To facilitate better understanding of the aforesaid provisions, it would be proper to recapitulate Sub -clause (b) of Clause 6.15 as follows: "Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, no sum due from any consumer shall be recoverable after the period of two years from the date when such sum became first due unless such sum has been shown continuously as recoverable as arrear of charges of elctricity supplied, and the supply of the electricity shall not be disconnected by licensee for this reason.";

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.