Gaurang Kanth vs Bses Rajdhani Power Limited

S. Ravindra Bhat, J

The appellant is aggrieved by the order of the Single Judge rejecting his petition remanding the disputes urged by him with respect to the order made

by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (hereafter referred to as ‘CGRF’) set up under Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003.

Briefly, the dispute relates to electricity connection provided by the BSES Rajdhani Power Limited (hereafter ‘BSES’). The appellant urges

that the CGRF does not possess the jurisdiction to issue the kind of directions that it did, i.e. to disconnect the electricity supply given to him. It is

contended that the CGRF was not apprised of the pending civil dispute between the parties initially instituted before this Court but later transferred to

the Saket District Courts, in which the appellant/plaintiff had secured an ex parte interim order protecting the possession in respect of the property. It

was urged that the suit seeks appropriate reliefs in respect of the title to the property.

The contesting respondent (hereafter referred to as the ‘complainant’) urged that the appellant’s title is suspect and that the Tribunal

possessed parallel jurisdiction since the respondent falls within the description of a complainant and a consumer. The wrongful grant of electricity

supply, it was urged, was therefore, well within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal which correctly exercised it. The appellant’s articulated grievance,

it was urged, was with respect to denial of natural justice, which has been accorded by the impugned order.

This Court had during the pendency of these proceedings directed the inclusion of the pleadings of the suit in the appeal record. The electronic

record of the suit was made part of the record in this appeal. A consideration of those would show that on 10.07.2015 an ex parte order was made

securing the appellant’s possession and also protecting his right to ingress and egress to the property. During the course of hearing, it became

apparent that the complainant’s grievance is really with respect to the location of electricity feeder lines, which, it is contended, are over the

undisputed portions of the property over which the complainant has exclusive right, title and interest.

In these circumstances, the Court is of the opinion that without entering into a discussion as to the maintainability of the complaint or feasibility to

further proceedings before the CGRF, it would be appropriate to direct the BSES to take suitable steps to shift the electricity feeder lines to the

alleged common passage which is the disputed portion and covered by the order of the Court dated 10.07.2015 in CS(OS) No.1947/2015

(subsequently re-numbered afresh before the Saket Court). The parties i.e. the appellant and the complainant/respondent are hereby directed to

cooperate in this process with the Local Commissioner to be appointed by the Court for this purpose.

Ms. Sakshi Kotiyal, Advocate (Mobile No. 9599110515) is hereby appointed as the Local Commissioner; she shall proceed to the property i.e.

property bearing No.268, Naseem Bagh, TTI Road, Jamia Nagar, Okhla, New Delhi-110025. The Local Commissioner’s fee is fixed at `50,000/-.

The Commissioner shall intimate to the parties the date and time when the inspection proceeding would be conducted for marking the area to facilitate

the shifting of the cable lines by the BSES to the alleged common passage (disputed portion covered by order dated 10.07.2015). The BSES shall

either concurrently or within a week from the said date, shift the said electricity lines. The Commissioner shall file a report to the Court within two

weeks. The Registry is directed to transmit a copy of the Local Commissioner’s report to the file of the re-numbered suit i.e. CS(OS)

No.6195/2016 before the Saket District Court, ADJ-04 or the successor court. In case Local Commissioner identifies that the existing lines are partly

or wholly on the disputed passage, then there is no question of shifting them. However, they would be shifted only to the extent necessary. In either

event, the expenses for shifting and the fee of the Local Commissioner shall be borne by the appellant. The BSES shall also produce the appropriate

files and the documents relating to the electricity supply to the suit property available with it.

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.