M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PLOT NO. 76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL (M.P.)

FA No. 722 / 2017.

Adhikshan Yantri, M.P. Pashchim Kshetra Vidhyut Vitaran Company Ltd. Mandsaur & Anr. …. APPELLANTS.

Versus Mohanlal s/o Kanhaiyalal Porwal, R/o Rampura Darwaja, Garoth, District Mandsaur (M.P.). …. RESPONDENT.

As per Shri Justice Shantanu Kemkar, (oral) :

Date of O R D E R

Order

19.10.2022 Shri Ajay Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant.

None for the respondent.

Heard.

2. This appeal arises out of the order dated 27.12.2016 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mandsaur (for short the ‘District Commission’) in CC No.132 /2015 whereby the District Commission while rejecting the plea of the appellant / opposite party to the effect that the respondent / complainant is not covered under the term ‘consumer’ as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 allowed the complaint and set-aside the alleged recovery sought to be made by the appellant / opposite party on the basis of audit objection.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant at the out-set has referred to the pleadings of the complaint and has stated that undisputedly the electricity connection was of 8