Full Text
Translation output
$~36
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF: DElHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 8179/2011
BSES RAJDHANI POWER LIMITED ..... Petitioner
VIJAY SAINI
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF: DElHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 8179/2011
BSES RAJDHANI POWER LIMITED ..... Petitioner
VIJAY SAINI
CORAM:
Through Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anupam Varma & Mr. Nikhil
Sharma, Advocates
Sharma, Advocates
VERSUS
, ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Deb Nandan Rajak, Advocate
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
13.03.2013
Present petition has been' fileq by the petitioner under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of ln'dia challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 29.8.2011 passed by the Consumer Grievance R.edressal
Forum (CGRF) for BSES Rajd~ani Power Ltd.
Learned counsel for the p~titioner submits that the petition(~r and ....__ respondent had arrived at an amicab'le settlement before the CGRF. The
~ settlement was filed before the forum, however, the forum has extended its jurisdiction and passed general directions in the matter calling upon the petitioner to produce the guidelines and procedures for settlement.
Learned counsel for the parties $ubmit that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties befpre the CGRF, there was no necessity for the CGRF to have passed any general directions in the matter. It is further submitted by Mr.Sethi, learned seniqr counsel that the CGRF llad no jurisdiction over the matter as the matter pertains to the theft of electricity
2013:DHC:7485
' and in accordance with Regul·ation B(i) the Forum cannot take up any kind of grievance concerning theft except the grievances arising under Sections
126, 127, 135, 139, 143, 152 and 161 of the Act. Counsel for the petitioner thus prays that the order passed by the CGRF may be modified.
I have heard counsel for the parties and considered their submissions. In view of the stand ·.taken by counsel for the respondents and taking into consideration regulation 8(1) the Forum has no jurisdiction over n1atters relating to theft of elec~ricity. Thus, there was no occasion for the Forum to entertain the complaint of the respondent and pass general directions. Accordingly, the order pa.ssed by the CGRF is modified to the extent that the direction issued to the petitioner regarding terms of seltlement is set aside.
Accordingly writ petition stands :disposed of.
MARCH rs
13, 2013
------e::-£. ~
G.S.SISTANI, J
2013:DHC:7485
Through Mr. Deb Nandan Rajak, Advocate
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
13.03.2013
Present petition has been' fileq by the petitioner under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of ln'dia challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 29.8.2011 passed by the Consumer Grievance R.edressal
Forum (CGRF) for BSES Rajd~ani Power Ltd.
Learned counsel for the p~titioner submits that the petition(~r and ....__ respondent had arrived at an amicab'le settlement before the CGRF. The
~ settlement was filed before the forum, however, the forum has extended its jurisdiction and passed general directions in the matter calling upon the petitioner to produce the guidelines and procedures for settlement.
Learned counsel for the parties $ubmit that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties befpre the CGRF, there was no necessity for the CGRF to have passed any general directions in the matter. It is further submitted by Mr.Sethi, learned seniqr counsel that the CGRF llad no jurisdiction over the matter as the matter pertains to the theft of electricity
2013:DHC:7485
' and in accordance with Regul·ation B(i) the Forum cannot take up any kind of grievance concerning theft except the grievances arising under Sections
126, 127, 135, 139, 143, 152 and 161 of the Act. Counsel for the petitioner thus prays that the order passed by the CGRF may be modified.
I have heard counsel for the parties and considered their submissions. In view of the stand ·.taken by counsel for the respondents and taking into consideration regulation 8(1) the Forum has no jurisdiction over n1atters relating to theft of elec~ricity. Thus, there was no occasion for the Forum to entertain the complaint of the respondent and pass general directions. Accordingly, the order pa.ssed by the CGRF is modified to the extent that the direction issued to the petitioner regarding terms of seltlement is set aside.
Accordingly writ petition stands :disposed of.
MARCH rs
13, 2013
------e::-£. ~
G.S.SISTANI, J
2013:DHC:7485
JUDGMENT