SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 5568

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
M S E D CO LTD – Appellant
Versus
MOHAMMAD ILIYAS SALAM ANSARI – Respondent
SC/CB1/27/A/17/500



Date of Filing :03.06.2017 Date of Order :06.05.2025 MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,MUMBAI, BENCH AT CHHATRAPATI SAMBHAJINAGAR.

FIRST APPEAL NO. : 500 OF 2017 IN COMPLAINT CASE NO.: 155 OF 2017 DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION : AURANGABAD. Maharashtra State Electricity Appellant Distribution Co.Ltd, (Adv.P.S.Mehta)

Urban Division II, Chikalthana Sub Div. MIDC unit,Aurangabad.

Mr.Prashant Bhimrao Futane, Additional Executive Engineer, R/o N-1, Cidco, Aurangabad.

Having its office at Division Office, Chikalthana Aurngabad.

VERSUS Mohd. Iliyas Salam Ansari, R/o Plot No. 58, Gut No.5, Ajij Colony, Naregaon, Aurangabad. (Since Deceased)

Through its Legal Representatives, A-1. Nasim w/o Iliyas Ansari, R/o Ajij Colony, Naregaon, Aurangabad.

A-2. Sarfraj Ansari s/o Mohd. Iliyas Ansari, R/o Plot No. 58, Gut No. 105, Naregaon , Aurangabad.

A-3. Ayaj Ansari s/o Mohd. Iliyas Ansari, R/o Near Municipal Corporation Hospital, Harsh Nagar, Labour colony, Aurangabad.

A-4. Mohammed Alfraj Ansari s/o Mohd. Iliyas Ansari, R/o Plot No.104, Naregaon, Aurangabad.

A-5. Fayyaz Ansari s/o Mohd. Iliyas Ansari, R/o House No. 26-1-370, Harsh Nagar, Labour colony, Aurangabad.

A-6. Mohammad Abad Ansari s/o Mohd. Iliyas Ansari, R/o Lane No. 01, N-7, Cidco, Aurangabad.

FIRST APPEAL NO. : 531 OF 2017 IN COMPLAINT CASE NO.: 155 OF 2017 DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION : AURANGABAD.

Mohd. Iliyas Salam Ansari, Appellants R/o Plot No. 58, Gut No.5, Ajij Colony, (Adv.S.T.Agrawal)

Naregaon, Aurangabad. (Since Deceased)

Through its Legal Representatives, A-1. Nasim w/o Iliyas Ansari, R/o Ajij Colony, Naregaon, Aurangabad.

A-2. Sarfraj Ansari s/o Mohd. Iliyas Ansari, R/o Plot No. 58, Gut No. 105, Naregaon , Aurangabad.

A-3. Ayaj Ansari s/o Mohd. Iliyas Ansari, R/o Near Municipal Corporation Hospital, Harsh Nagar, Labour colony, Aurangabad.

A-4. Mohammed Alfraj Ansari s/o Mohd. Iliyas Ansari, R/o Plot No.104, Naregaon, Aurangabad.

A-5. Fayyaz Ansari s/o Mohd. Iliyas Ansari, R/o House No. 26-1-370, Harsh Nagar, Labour colony, Aurangabad.

A-6. Mohammad Abad Ansari s/o Mohd. Iliyas Ansari, R/o Lane No. 01, N-7, Cidco, Aurangabad.

Versus

1) Maharashtra State Electricity Respondent No.1 Distribution Co.Ltd, (Adv.P.S.Mehta)

Urban Division II, Chikalthana Sub Div. MIDC unit,Aurangabad.

Mr.Prashant Bhimrao Futane, Additional Executive Engineer, R/o N-1, Cidco, Aurangabad.

Having its office at Division Office, Chikalthana Aurngabad.

2) M.A.Baqui, Respondent No.2 R/o Aurangabad. (Adv.S.J.Sikandar)

CORAM : Milind.S.Sonawane, Hon’ble Presiding Member.

Dr.Nisha A.Chavhan, Hon’ble Member.

Nagesh C.Kumbre, Hon’ble Member.

J U D G M E N T

(Delivered on 06/05/2025)

Per Milind.S.Sonawane, Hon’ble Presiding Member.

As these two appeals arose out of one impugned judgment we are conveniently taking them together for the adjudication. First Appeal No.500/2017 has been filed by the Maharashtra Electricity Distribution Company (‘MSEDCL' for short) against Mohammad Iliyas Abdul Salam Ansari (‘Mohammad Ansari’ for short) whereas First Appeal 531/2017 has been filed by Mohammad Ansari against the MSEDCL. During the pendency of these appeals Mohmmad Ansari died and his legal hairs have been taken on record. As such, they are referred to as Mohammad Ansari hereinafter for the brevity. Respondent no.2 namely M.A.Baqui, in A/531/2017 has been permitted to be added in the array of the respondents (who is the father of Ujma Bagwan, the land owner of the land, on which the bakery of Mohammad Ansari is operational) by our Ld. predecessor bench on the ground that, there has been disputes between Mohammad Ansari and his daughter Ujma regarding the premises in which the electricity supply was disputedly supplied. It is worth to mention here that, respondent no.2 who has claimed to be a father of Ujma (land lord) is representing her, but no authority letter has been given to him by her. But still so as to do complete justice we will be considering the version of that side only because they have been admitted by our pred

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top