RAMRAJ PANWAR vs JUNIOR ENGINEER, M.P.ELECTRICITY BOARD

THIS appeal has arisen from order dated 14.11.1995 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (For short District Forum) Betul in Complaint Case No. 47/95. THIS complaint was dismissed on the grounds that it was a law and order question as it was criminal case of theft of electricity for which respondent M.P.E.B. could not be held responsible.

APPELLANT in his application dated 7.4.1998 before us, has pleaded that he had filed an application before the District Forum requesting for amending the complaint by making M.P.E.B. a party to the complaint. He further averred that the District Forum having rejected his complaint on grounds that it was not enter- tainable in District Forum has failed to pass any order on this application making M.P.E.B. a party. Result is that M.P.E.B. is not an authorised party before us. Having heard both the parties and having perused the record of the case we are of the opinion that M.P.E.B. was a necessary party in the case and complainant''s plea for joining M.P.E.B. as a party should have been accepted in the interest of justice. We are also unable to agree with the view of District Forum that theft of electricity was a criminal matter and law and order problem. In our opinion, it was necessary for M.P.E.B. to take action on the complaint lodged by complainant, with the help of police, if necessary, to stop this theft. After all a genuine consumer who pays bill for the electricity supplied to him cannot be deprived of his genuine benefit because of unauthorised action of some people in his Mohalla or ward. M.P.E.B. cannot be accepted as helpless party. Since no order can be passed against M.P.E.B. without hearing their side and bringing on record what action was taken by them to prevent theft, we therefore feel that this case will have to be remanded to the District Forum, Betul with direction to allow M.P.E.B. to be made a party and then hear the case de novo to decide whether there was any deficiency on the part of M.P.E.B. We order accordingly.

In the context of discussion in foregoing paragraphs the order dated 14.11.1995 of District Forum is hereby set aside. The case is remanded to District Forum, Betu1 for de novo hearing of the case. The appellant be permitted to make M.P.E.B. a party, after that both parties should be permitted to produce such fresh evidence as they may choose to produce. The case be decided expeditiously within 8 months of the receipt of this case on remand. Both parties are further directed to appear before the District Forum, Betul on 18.5.1998 to obtain further dates of hearing. No order as to costs. Appeal allowed.