1. This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 19.7.2011 passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Circuit Bench at Bikaner (in short, ''the State Commission'') in Appeal No. 1223 of 2011 - Assistant Engineer (Distribution) Jd. V.V.N. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Shriganganagar Oil Mill Pvt. Ltd. by which, while dismissing appeal, order of District Forum allowing complaint was upheld.
2. Brief facts of the case are that Complainant/respondent purchased Plot No.80/34 situated in Padampur as per order of Debts Recovery Tribunal and applied for taking new electricity connection in the name of complainant. OP/petitioner issued demand note and demanded earlier dues outstanding against previous occupier of the premises. It was further submitted that complainant was not liable to make payment of aforesaid dues. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint before District forum. OP resisted complaint and submitted that as per Clause No. 14.6 and Clause No. 42 of the terms and conditions of supply of electricity, connection can be released in favour of complainant only after depositing entire dues pertaining to said premises and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District forum after hearing both the parties allowed complaint and directed OP to release electricity connection immediately and not ask for depositing earlier outstanding amount and further directed to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.2100/-. Appeal filed by OP was dismissed by learned State Commission vide impugned order against which this revision petition has been filed.
3. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused record.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that order passed by learned State commission is not speaking order; hence, revision petition be allowed and impugned order be set aside and matter may be remanded back to learned State Commission. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that learned District forum has considered all the aspects and order passed by learned State Commission is in accordance with law; hence, revision petition be dismissed.
5. Order passed by learned State Commission runs as under:
"...Before learned District Forum limited question was as to whether on account
of dues of old arrear regarding the premises new connection can be given or not.
Order of the Learned District forum Shriganganagar is not necessitated to be
interfered to this extent."
6. Hon''ble Apex Court in (2001) 10 SCC 659 - HVPNL Vs. Mahavir observed as under:
"1.In a number of cases coming up in appeal in this Court, we find that the State
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana at Chandigarh is passing a
standard order in the following terms:
''We have heard the Law Officer of HVPN - appellant and have also
perused the impugned order. We do not find any legal infirmity in the
detailed and well-reasoned order passed by District Forum, Kaithal.
Accordingly, we uphold the impugned order and dismiss the appeal''.
2. We may point out that while dealing with a first appeal, this is not the way to
dispose of the matter. The appellate forum is bound to refer to the pleadings of the
case, the submissions of the counsel, necessary points for consideration, discuss
the evidence and dispose of the matter by giving valid reasons. It is very easy to
dispose of any appeal in this fashion and the higher courts would not know
whether learned State Commission had applied its mind to the case. We hope that
such orders will not be passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission, Haryana at Chandigarh in future. A copy of this order may be
communicated to the Commission".
7. In the light of above judgment, it becomes clear that Appellate Court while deciding an
appeal is required to deal with all the aspects and contentions raised by the appellant and as
learned State Commission has not dealt with any contentions and arguments of the appellant
raised in memo of appeal, it would be appropriate to remand the matter back to the learned State
Commission for disposal of appeal by speaking order after dealing with all the contentions and
arguments raised by the parties.
8. Consequently, revision petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and order dated 19.7.2011 passed by the learned State Commission in Appeal No. 1223 of 2011 - Assistant Engineer (Distribution) Jd. V.V.N. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Shriganganagar Oil Mill Pvt. Ltd. is set aside and matter is remanded back to the learned State Commission for deciding it by speaking order after giving an opportunity of being heard to the parties. Learned State Commission is directed to decide appeal expeditiously.
9. Parties are directed to appear before the learned State Commission on 02.11.2015.
