ADDITIONAL BENCH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH.

Date of institution : 31.05.2023 Reserved on : 29.01.2026 Date of decision : 10.02.2026 Tarlok Singh aged about 50 years son of late Sh.Raj Singh R/o H.No.6094, Mohalla Sukhdaspura, Near B-Tank, Patiala (Aadhaar Card No.6439 3572 3572)

…..Appellant/Complainant Versus

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, H.O., The Mall, Patiala, through its CMD.

2. XEN, West Division, Patiala.

3. AEE, Sub Division, Model Town, Commercial-2, Patiala.

4. Swatanter Goyal son of Sh.Shanti Swaroop Goyal R/o House No.7001978, Near Yadvindra Enclave, Nabha Road, Patiala.

….Respondents/Opposite parties First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 10.03.2023 passed the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Patiala.

Quorum:-

Mr. H.P.S. Mahal, Presiding Judicial Member Mrs. Kiran Sibal, Member Present:

For the appellants : Sh.Himanshu Khanna, proxy for Sh.Ashok Bhardwaj, Advocate For respondents No.1to3 : Ms.Priyanka Goyal, Advocate For respondent No.4 : Ex-parte HARINDER PAL SINGH MAHAL, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/complainant against the impugned order dated 10.03.2023 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Patiala (in short, “the District Commission”), whereby the complaint filed by complainant against opposite parties (in short ‘OPs’), under Consumer Protection Act, was dismissed.

It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Commission.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant is the owner in possession of H.No.6094, Mohalla Sukhdaspura, Near B-Tank, Patiala and is residing with his family members. The house of the complainant was within Lal Lakir. The electricity and water connection was installed in the said house. Sh.Swatanter Goyal, who is an influenced person wants to take the forcible possession of my house. The complainant also filed a civil suit against Sh.Swatanter Goyal for permanent injunction restraining him from dispossessing complainant from the said house. The judgment and decree dated 15.01.2021 was passed in favour of the complainant by Sh.G.S.Johal, PCS, Ld. Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.), Patiala. The complainant being the owner of the house applied for the electricity connection with opposite party No.1, who vide account No.3005652259 was installed in the said house. The complainant paying the consumption charges thereof. Sh.Swatanter Goyal moved a false application to the opposite party for disconnecting the electricity connection without having any right, title authority to do so. On this, the employees of the electricity department i.e. opposite party No.1 visited the house to disconnect the connection but due to timely intervention of the complainant and respectables, the disconnection could not be effected. To utter surprise, the electricity bill of the said house has been generated in the name of Sh.Swatanter Goyal. The opposite party at the behest of Sh.Swatanter Goyal is adamant to disconnect the electricity connection, in question. Having no other remedy, the complainant approached the District Commission seeking following reliefs:

i) not to disconnect the electricity connection account No.3005652259 installed in House No.6094, Mohalla Sukhdaspura, Near B-Tank, Patiala and to restore the same in the name of the complainant;

ii) to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- as litigation expenses; and iii) to pay Rs.25,000/- on account of inconvenience, mental harassment, mental agony, caused to the complainant.

3. Upon notice, opposite parties No.1 to 3 appeared and through their counsel, whereas opposite party No.4 did not appear.

4. Opposite parties No.1 to 3 did not file their reply, whereas they filed an application for dismissing the complaint, stating therein that the complainant is not the consumer of opposite parties No.1 to 3 becaus