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

2026 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 617

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
MANINDER SINGH – Respondent
SC/3/FA/602/2025



Petitioner Advocates:ADITI SHARMA ,Respondent Advocate:

##PAGE1##

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

First Appeal No. 602 of 2025

Date of institution : 01.08.2025

Reserved on : 19.01.2026

Date of Decision : 28.01.2026

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Fountain Chowk,

Ludhiana-141001

2. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Fountain Chowk,

Ludhiana through its S.D.O./XEN/Junior Engineer – 141001

3. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, The Mall, Patiala –

147001 through its Chairman.

….Appellants/Opposite Parties

Versus

1. Maninder Singh @ Manederjit Singh, son of Shri Lakhbir Singh,

resident of Kothi No. 65, Basant Vatika Ext., Phulan Wala Basant

Avenue, P.O. Ludhiana – 141013

.…Respondent No.1/Complainant

2. Damanjit Kaur, wife of Late Shri Lakhbir Singh, resident of Flat

No. 12, Second Floor, HIG Flats, Opposite Girls Khalsa College,

Ghumar Mandi Road, Ludhiana-141001

….Respondent No.2

First Appeal under Section 41 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the

order dated 11.04.2025 passed by the District

Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission,

Ludhiana in C.C. No. 551 of 2021.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President

Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Member

Mr. Vishav Kant Garg, Member

##PAGE2##

First Appeal No. 602 of 2025 2

1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be

allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No

3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No

Present:-

For the appellants : Ms. Aditi Sharma, Advocate

For respondent No.1 : Mr. Maninder Singh, in person

For respondent No.2 : Ms. Damanjit Kaur, in person

VISHAV KANT GARG, MEMBER :

Appellants/Opposite Parties i.e. PSPCL Ltd., have filed the

present Appeal through its SDO to challenge the impugned order dated

11.04.2025 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal

Commission, Ludhiana (in short, “the District Commission”), whereby the

Complaint filed by the Respondent No.1/Complainant-Maninder Singh

had been partly allowed.

2. It would be apposite to mention here that hereinafter the

parties will be referred, as were arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out by the Respondent

No.1/Complainant in the Complaint filed before the District Commission

are that the Complainant was the co-owner in Flat No.12, Second Floor,

HIG Flats, Opposite Girls Khalsa College, Ghumar Mandi Road, Ludhiana,

where he had been using separate electric connection, installed by the

OPs. In the year 2017, the OPs had disconnected said electricity

connection without giving any intimation to him. On approaching, the OPs

had informed to the Complainant that they were unable to restore the said

connection and had advised to apply for the new electric connection. On

11.10.2019, the Complainant had paid the requisite fee for the installation

##PAGE3##

First Appeal No. 602 of 2025 3

of new electric connection but the OPs had neither restored the old electric

connection nor released the new electric connection in his name in the

said premises.

4. Stating the act of the opposite parties to be a case of

deficiency in service’ and ‘unfair trade practice’, it was prayed in the

Complaint that the OPs be directed to reinstall the old electric meter No.

3002493432 or to install the new connection. It was prayed that

Rs.2,00,000/- be awarded as compensation on account of causing mental

suffering, agony and harassment at the hands of the OPs.

5. Upon issuance of notice in the Complaint, the Appellants/

Opposite Parties had filed the written statement, raising certain preliminary

objections that the Complaint was not maintainable. The Complainant had

not approached the Commission with clean hands and had suppressed the

material facts. It was pleaded that the Complainant had applied for new

electric connection with them. He had submitted an Application and

Agreement Form alongwith Aadhaar Card. Thereafter, the OPs had issued

demand notice vide order dated 10.10.2019 and the Complainant was

directed to comply with the same. Thereafter, JE had visited the installation

site and had noticed

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