- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 28.05.2009 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Haridwar dismissing the Consumer Complaint No. 82/2008. 2
(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are that the complainant Shri Ghamandi Singh has an electricity connection taken from the Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd. (for short "Corporation") for domestic purpose. He received a notice/letter dated 19.04.2007 (Paper No. 45) issued by the Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Sub -division, Bhagwanpur, Roorkee, District Haridwar opposite party no. 2 asking him to deposit an amount of Rs. 44,538/ - against the outstanding dues within 30 days from the receipt of the notice. According to the complainant, he received the said notice on 02.12.2007. The complainant has expressed his ignorance as to how and why the said demand notice has been sent to him inspite of the fact that he has been depositing the electricity bills regularly and there are no outstanding dues against him. The complainant sent a registered notice to the opposite parties through his counsel requesting therein to withdraw the notice, but the opposite parties did not take any action. This led the complainant to file a consumer complaint before the District Consumer Forum, Haridwar. The District Consumer Forum, after an appreciation of the facts of the case, dismissed the consumer complaint. Aggrieved by the order passed by the District Consumer Forum, the complainant has filed this appeal.
(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the District Consumer Forum has erred by holding that the consumer complaint is not maintainable before the District Consumer Forum due to the provision under Section 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the respondents had not conducted any raid in the appellant's house, where the electricity connection no. 1932/046179 is installed. The inspection report dated 21.12.2004 (Paper No. 36), which was submitted by the respondents3 before the District Consumer Forum, is a fabricated and manipulated document and its falsehood is apparent from the fact that the respondents did not initiate any action against the appellant under the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003. He also challenged the findings of the District Consumer Forum that the inspecting team of Corporation had taken away the wiring and fittings of the shop to which unauthorised supply of power by the appellant is being alleged by the respondents. The learned counsel submitted that no such averment has been made by the respondent no. 2 in the affidavit dated 05.08.2008. In support of his arguments, the learned counsel referred to the report submitted by the Advocate Commissioner, wherein it is stated that there is no electrical fittings in the said shops which are situated at a distance of 200 meters from the appellant's house. The supply of electricity to these shops in an unauthorised manner using a cable is impracticable because the shops are 200 meters away from the appellant's house. The learned counsel also submitted that the District Consumer Forum has erred by not relying on the affidavits filed by four persons, the neighbours of the appellant, wherein they have stated that there is no electricity connection or fittings in these shops of the appellant and the appellant has never supplied electricity to these shops from his domestic electricity connection and also that there are no outstanding dues of electricity against the appellant. Thus, the learned counsel for the appellant argued that the findings of the District Consumer Forum are without any basis and, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.;