Case nº Revision Petition No. 3308 Of 2016, (Against the Order dated 24/08/2016 in Appeal No. 590/2015 of the State Commission Maharastra) of NCDRC Cases, May 24, 2017 (case Anil Ramchandra Babhale Vs Executive Engineer, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd.)
|Judge:||For Appellant: Mr Akash P Joshi, Advocate|
|President:||Mrs. Rekha Gupta,Presiding Member|
|Defense:||Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 21(b)|
|Resolution Date:||May 24, 2017|
|Issuing Organization:||NCDRC Cases|
Rekha Gupta, Presiding Member
As per the complaint, the petitioner had started Stone Mine and set up a big plant of Gitti Khadan and Thresher machine. The said Thresher Machine Plant was in the name of M/s Om Crushing Company of which the petitioner was the proprietor. On 31.03.2007, they took an electric connection from the respondent/ opposite party for the said plant. He alleges that the power supply was disconnected without any prior notice and there were no outstanding dues. The contention of the respondent was that the petitioner was informed that the power supply has been disconnected on the directions of the Forest Officer. He was further informed that they should obtain a no-objection from the Forest Department for restoration of the electric connection. Petitioner has stated that due to non-supply of electricity connection, the Thresher Machine has been closed and the petitioner has been suffering a loss of Rs.50,000/- per day. Hence he filed a complaint with the District Forum with the following prayer:
The respondent while denying the allegation has contended that the petitioner was not a consumer as he was using the electric connection for commercial purpose. On 26.12.2012 notice has been issued to the petitioner and other persons to bring NOC from the Forest Department, but the petitioner has failed to do so. They further stated that the electricity connection cannot be restored without the NOC from the Forest Department. The Forest Officer had filed an FIR against the petitioner for illegal mining, excavation and encroachment in the forest land.
The Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nagpur vide its order dated 09.07.2015 had dismissed the complaint.
Aggrieved by the order the District Forum, petitioner/ complainant filed an appeal before the State Commission. The State Commission vide its order dated 24.08.2016 had passed the following order:
"None is present for the appellant. Perusal of the previous proceeding reflects that as the appellant is not appearing in this matter since, last two days, this matter was adjourned, till today by way of last chance with an observation that this appeal deserves to be dismissed for want of prosecution. As none for the appellant is present today also, this appeal be called at the end of the board for appropriate order.
Matter is recalled at...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL