Case Law Details
Ram Naresh Singh & 3 Ors Vs Executive Engineer (NCDRC Delhi)
Conclusion: In present facts of the case, it was held by the National Commission that Consumer Protection Act being a beneficial legislation, benefit of ambiguity/doubt needs to go to the Consumer.
Facts: The present Revision Petition (RP) was filed by the Petitioners against Respondent under section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 11.02.2021 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.P., Lucknow in which order dated 03.05.1999 of District Forum was challenged, inter alia praying for setting aside the order & judgment dated 11.02.2021 passed by the State Commission in Appeal No. 1707/1999.
On 31.10.1979, the father of the Petitioners got the boring done on the land and applied for electricity connection along with requisite fees. The Respondent issued a receipt for the same to the petitioners’ father. On 16.10.1980 the respondent surveyed the spot and prepared the survey statement for which the petitioners’ father paid the expenses. After completing all the formalities, it was fixed to provide the electricity connection to the petitioners’ father and the respondent buried the poles on the spot. After that neither the wires were drawn and nor any connection was provided to the petitioners’ father. Nor any pumping set was installed or operated by the respondent and nor any electricity has been utilized. The petitioners’ father complained continuously for the same with the respondent but as they were facing problems regarding farming. The father of the petitioners complained with the higher Authority about the electricity connection and also informed about the illegal money demanded by the respondent’s employees on which the respondent’s employees threatened him. The respondent issued a demand letter to the petitioners’ father and without providing any electricity connection, a bill was raised showing fake documents about the electricity connection in their records whereas no electricity connection was provided and no electricity was consumed by the petitioners’ father. No bill other than recovery letter has been issued by the respondent. On 08.10.1994, 23.02.1996, 01.03.1997, 31.03.1997 and on 07.05.1997, letters were sent to the Electricity Department requesting that the since the pole has fallen, electricity connection is not there and bill is continuing to come, the fake bill be waved off and connection be given. Hence, the Complainants filed complaint before the District Forum.
The District Forum accepted the complaint and directed the OP to install the electric connection wire on the pumping set of the complainants within a period of one month from the date of order and it was also held that the OP was not entitled to get any earlier amount in respect of the alleged electricity connection of the pumping set and accordingly the demand letter given by the OP in respect of the said electricity connection was cancelled. Aggrieved by the said Order dated 03.05.1999 of District Forum, Respondent appealed in State Commission. Vide order dated 11.02.2021 the State Commission accepted the Appeal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
