O R D E R

( 08.06.2026 )

The following order of the Bench was delivered by Dr. Monika Malik, Member.

This appeal by the complainant/appellant (hereinafter referred to as ‘complainant’), is directed against the order dated 11.6.2021 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bhind (for short ‘District Commission’), in complaint case No. 95/2021, whereby the District Commission has dismissed the complaint at admission stage, without issuing notice to the opposite party.

2. Heard.

3. Learned counsel for appellant submits that by the impugned order the District Commission has dismissed the complaint at admission stage on the ground that the electricity connection obtained by the complainant is non-domestic/industrial connection. It has been further observed that though the complainant has stated that the said electricity connection is obtained for the purpose of earning his livelihood, however, nowhere in the complaint he has specifically stated that the said connection is obtained exclusively for self-employment and that no other person is there to assist him in the business. Therefore, the complaint was dismissed by the District Commisson on the ground that the complainant does not fall within the definition of ‘consumer’ under Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

4. Learned counsel for appellant further argued that the complainant has categorically pleaded in the complaint that the said electricity connection was obtained for the purpose of earning livelihood by way of self-employment. He, therefore, prayed that the impugned order be set aside.

5. Learned counsel for the opposite parties/respondents Electricity Company, supported the impugned order and argued that the District Commission has rightly dismissed the complaint, as not maintainable. He further argued that he has not correctly mentioned the sanctioned load/Horse Power (HP), of the electricity connection, which was obtained. He, therefore, prayed that the appeal be dismissed.

6. On perusal of complaint filed by the complainant, we find that he has specifically pleaded that he had obtained electricity connection in question for earning his livelihood by way of self-employment. The District Commission on its own has reached a conclusion that tariff category is industrial and therefore, the electricity connection is of commercial nature. We, however, of an opinion that the District Commisson ought to have issued notice to the Electricity Company and should have decided the matter after their version was brought on record and specific objection to this effect, backed with evidence would have been raised. Merely on the basis of two documents filed by the complainant, which do not conclusively prove commercial nature of the matter, an adverse inference against him cannot be drawn.

7. So far as contention of the Electricity Company that the complainant has not clearly mentioned about the sanctioned load/HP of the electricity connection in question, we observe that the electricity bill (Annexure C-2) shows the sanctioned load as 5 HP and the same corroborates with the pleadings of the complainant.

8. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we are of the opinion that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the case be remanded back to the District Commission for deciding it afresh.

9. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remanded back to the District Commission for reconsidering the case afresh in accordance with law, on merits, after hearing both parties.

10. Complainant/appellant is directed to appear before the District Commission on 6th July, 2026.

11. Record of the District Commission be sent back forthwith.

12. All contentions of the parties are kept open.

13. With the aforesaid directions, this appeal is disposed of, with, no order as to costs.