IMPORTANT POINT
Where electricity bill has been drawn by the supplier of electricity without following the procedure prescribed under section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act, such bill will be illegal.

Uma S. Bora, Member—Executive Engineer, MSEB, Dhule Division challenges in this appeal the judgment and order passed by, District Consumer Forum, Dhule on 27.5.2005 in complaint case No. 70/2004.

2. The order under challenge is of cancelling the bill of Rs. 1,20,210 of electricity. By the said order District Forum also directed the appellant to adjust the amount of Rs. 24,040 which was deposited by the complainant in future bills. District Forum also directed the appellant to pay Rs.1,000 for mental agony and Rs. 1,000 for cost.

3. Facts giving arise to this appeal are as under:

Complainant Harilal Jagannath Chitte is resident of Saptshrungi Colony, Dhule. He has a meter bearing No.9143676 and his consumer No. is 0800/0392202. On 10.2.2004 it is alleged that, some workers from MSEB visited the house of the complainant in his absence and handled the meter. This fact came to his knowledge after returning to home. On 17.2.2004 he received information from police Station that complaint under actions 135, 138 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003 has been filed against him at Cr. No. 24/2004. On 20.2.2004 he received bill of Rs. 1,20,210 and his electricity connection was disconnected by the appellant. On 21.2.2004 he approached to appellant and requested to recover the amount by installment, accordingly 20% amount of Rs. 1,20,210 deposited by him. At that time appellant compelled the complainant to make affidavit on stamp paper. He has no alternative

but to give the undertaking. The

said undertaking was given by the

complainant under pressure. Thereafter, he approached to District Forum on 27.4.2004 by filing the complaint.

4. The present appellant appeared before the District Forum and submitted that, as per visit of flying squad it is found that, complainant committed theft of electricity by connecting one wire to cut out. The bill was given after calculating the units used by complainant which were not recorded in the meter. After calculating the amount bill was issued which was legal. Committing theft of electricity is a serious offence; accordingly criminal complaint was also filed against the complainant. Disconnection of electricity because of theft committed by complainant is proper.

5. After hearing both the parties District Forum cancelled the disputed bill.

6. Notices of final hearing of appeal were issued to both the parties. Advocate S.N. Tandale, appeared for appellant and Shri Gajanan Mapari, appeared for respondent. Advocate Tandale submitted that as per flying squad report meter was found stopped and incoming was bye-passed. No seal was found on the meter box. Complainant was found using extra load than the sanctioned load. Therefore bill issued was proper. He further submitted that, complainant admitted the theft and deposited 20% of the amount of disputed bill. It is contended by the appellant that, complainant affirmed on oath that the said bill is accepted and accordingly he is ready to deposit the bill. It is submitted by Advocate Tandale that after admitting the guilt and depositing the installment of the disputed bill complainant filed complaint with ulterior motive to avoid the payment of bill of electricity.

7. Advocate Mapari for the respondent submitted that, officers of appellant visited the spot in the absence of complainant. The spot inspection report does not bear the signature of complainant. Panchnama conducted by appellant is not signed by any independent witness. Only officers and workers of MSEB signed the Panchnama and spot inspection report. Undertaking by the complainant was taken under the threat of disconnection. Due to fear of disconnection complainant constrained to deposit 20% of the disputed bill amount. He further submitted that Dist. Forum rightly allowed the complaint by considering all the facts on record.

8. We considered the arguments of both the parties and perused the record. Spot inspection report is on record. It bears no signature of complainant. Even independent witness ha