Letters Patent Appeal No. 1562 of 2011. Case: Paschim Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd Vs Devabhai Memabhai Myatra. High Court of Gujarat (India)
| Case Number | Letters Patent Appeal No. 1562 of 2011 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Ms. Lilu Bhaya, Adv. and For Respondents: Nirav Sanghvi, Ashish M. Dagli, Advs. |
| Judges | Vijay Manohar Sahai, J. and A. G. Uraizee , J. |
| Issue | Consumer Protection Act (68 of 1986) - Sections 2(1)(c), 13; Electricity Act (36 of 2003) - Section 135; Constitution of India - Article 226 |
| Citation | AIR 2014 Guj 26 |
| Judgement Date | December 23, 2013 |
| Court | High Court of Gujarat (India) |
Judgment:
Vijay Manohar Sahai, J.
-
We have heard Ms. Lilu K. Bhaya, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. Nirav Sanghvi, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Ashish M. Dagli for the respondent.
-
By the present Intra-Court Letters Patent Appeal, the appellants have challenged the judgment dated 24.9.2010 passed by the learned single Judge in Special Civil Application No.11180 of 2010 whereby the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellants - original petitioners.
-
The appellants filed writ petition before the learned single Judge being aggrieved by the order dated 28.4.2010 passed by the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Bhuj - Kutch in Complaint Application No.145 of 2008. The main contention of the appellants before the learned single Judge was that the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum/Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission do not have jurisdiction to entertain the complaints filed by the consumers under the provisions of the Consumer Act against the action taken by the appellants-Licensee Company under Section 124 read with Sections 125 and 126 of Electricity Act and/or under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, which means that for unauthorized use of electricity, if any action is taken by the appellant Company, the Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission do not have jurisdiction to entertain the complaints filed by the consumers.
-
Learned counsel Ms. Lilu K. Bhaya appearing for the appellants has placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of U. P. Power Corporation Limited and others v. Anis Ahmad, AIR 2013 Supreme Court 2766 wherein the Apex Court held that complaint made against assessment of unauthorized use of electricity under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, so also, the complaint made against action taken under Sections 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is not maintainable before the Consumer Forum. Paragraphs 45 to 47 of the decision are reproduced below:
"45. The National Commission though held that the intention of the Parliament is not to bar the jurisdiction of the Consumer Forum under the Consumer Protection Act and have saved the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, failed to notice that by virtue of Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 or Sections 173,174 and 175 of the Electricity Act, 2003, the Consumer Forum cannot derive power to adjudicate a dispute in relation to assessment made under Section 126 or offences under Sections...
To continue reading
Request your trial