1. The facts deciphering this case, in nutshell, as put forth in the body of the claim are that the claimant Nayab Hussain is the permanent resident of Chak No.119 G.B Savanna Pull Opp Sajjad Nagar Faisalabad, for the last about one and a half years. The claimant submitted an application before the Assistant Manager Operation Sub Division Sargodha Road Faisalabad on 13.04.2009, for supply of domestic electricity connection which application was received in the office of the said Assistant Manager Operation Sub Division Sargodha Road Faisalabad under registration No.1987/AIU. However, the electricity connection has not been supplied to the claimant's house despite repeated oral requests that his nearby houses have been electrified but that he has been deprived of such amenity being poor labour but in vain. Hence, the claimant has lodged this case against the Fesco Authorities concerned for installation of electricity connection to his house alongwith prayer for recovery of Rs.100000/- due to mental torture and physical agony u/s 25 of PCPA 2005.
2. The defendants have vehemently opposed the above said claim by filing their statement of defence, interalia, on the ground that area where the claimant's house is situated has been declared Industrial Estate that, therefore, the electricity connection could not by provided to his house under office order No.22694 dated 19.04.2008 issued by the Chief Executive Fesco Abdul Pur Faisalabad.
3. As the matter needed evidence due to its intricate nature, hence, parties were required to produce their evidence in support of their respective versions through their affidavits as well as documents. In this regard, Nayab Hussain the claimant has got recorded his statement as PW 1, through his affidavit EX-PW1/1, whereas he has also submitted the affidavits of Shakeel Ahmad S/O Shah Muhammad, Saeed Mashqoor Ahmad S/O Saeed Yawar Abbas, Muhammad Ashraf S/O Abdul Ghafoor and Abid Ali S/O Fazal Muhammad in support of his version. He has also tendered the documentary evidence as the sample of reports including X-rays as EX-P1 and EX-P2, slip board office Mark "A", photos Mark "B", to Mark "E". In rebuttal, Mehmood-ul-Hassan, Assistant Manager Operation Sub Division Sargodha Road Faisalabad has appeared as DW1 through his affidavit EX-DW1/1. In their documentary evidence, the defendants have submitted the site plan EXD-1and copy of notification No.22695 dated 19.04.2008, EX-D2.
4. During preliminary arguments, on 06.07.2009, learned defendants counsel raised contention that the house of consumer is situated in the Industrial estate, where no private connection could be provided to him. However, the claimant/consumer stated that the house of Muhammad Aslam is adjacent to his house towards its left side where electricity connection has been supplied by the defendants and which is private connection which was denied by the SDO Fesco in attendance in person. In view of such scenario, in order to ascertain such factual situation, Mr. Muhammad Raees Ahmad Batalvi Advocate was appointed as local commissioner to resolve the above said controversy and to prepared the report on the point whether there is no private electricity connection in the area. The learned local commissioner has submitted his report EX-CW1/1, alongwith site plan EX-CW1/1, alongwith copies of electricity bills Mark "A", and Mark "B", as his statement was also recorded as CW1.
5. After conclusion of evidence of the parties, I have heard learned counsel or parties at length and have perused record carefully and inestimably.
6. The main point of controversy in between the parties squeezed from there pleadings is whether or not the claimant's house is situated in an Industrial Estate and, therefore, is not entitled to electrify his house by the defendants. In this regard, I have critically appreciated the contents of the pleadings of the parties as well as the evidence as produced by them.
7. In para No.2 of the preliminary objections of the written statement, the defendants have stated as under:- "Prior to establishment of the Industrial Estate, some commercial and domestic electricity connections were provided on the main line of the Wapda Department but no such connection has been supplied after establishment of Industrial Estate for residential house".
8. Keeping in view such admission by the defendants in their written statement, I have carefully scanned the claimant's evidence and report of the local commissioner. On critical appreciation of such evidence, it appeared that, the house of one, Muhammad Aslam in adjacent to the house of the claimant but he has been supplied the electricity connection, that the houses in the lane behind the consumer's house have been electrified from the same transformer which has been installed on the pole at a far off distance from the such houses there the claimant's house. It is crystal clear from the report of the local commissioner EX-CW1/1, that electricity supply has been given the house of Muhammad Aslam S/O Muhammad Yousaf which is adjacent to the house of the claimant and that electricity connections and extensions have also been provided from the same transformer to the main Samanna Pull Road to the premises at Arzoo street and such street is situated behind the house of the claimant. Mehmood ul Hassan defendant No.3 reiterated the same version as DW1, through his affidavit DW1/1, as put forth in the written statement referred above. When subjected to cross-examination, he has been unable to put forth explanation about supply of electricity connection to the house adjacent of the claimant's house and in the street above refered. However, he has admitted that of such electric connections have been provided from the transformer on main road. He could not produce any document showing that the area where claimant's house is situated in a developed area or Industrial Estate. However, notification EX-D2 has been submitted showing that the electric connection should not be provided to the housing scheme without an approval of proper electrification by Assistance Manager (P-E) Fesco but such document can not come to the rescue of the defendants being contradictory to their own stand as delineated in their written statement as also because there is no proof of existence of a housing scheme there.
9. From the above said facts and circumstances, I have carefully squeezed out following points to my entire satisfaction:- a. The claimant/consumer submitted an application to the above said authority for installation of electricity meter in his house but he has been made a rolling stone as he was finally refused to electrify his house unjustifiably; b. It is quite evident from the statements and pleadings of the parties that the house adjacent to the consumer's house has been provided electricity connection by the same Fesco authorities who have refused to supply such connection to the claimant's house showing their dual slandered of electrification; c. The defendants have claimed that the claimant's house is situated in an Industrial Estate but no documentary proof has been submitted in this regard; d. Not only the local commissioner but also the inhabitants of the same locality through their affidavits supported the claim of the consumer; e. The defendants have provided electricity connections to the premises behind the house of the claimant at a far off distance from the claimant's house therefore, claimant should not be deprived of such facility of electrification of his house merely for the reason that he is a poor labour.
10. The upshot of the above whole discussion is that the consumer has proved his case to the satisfaction of this court as the defendant's services are defective, the "defect" in the "Act" having widest amplitude pertaining to services for the purpose of this statute as this definition is couched in the widest horizon of there being any fault, imperfection or short coming casting its net so wide so to bring it with its import any deviation from the requirements spelled out in the definition related to quality, or standard of services. Hence, the definition of "defect" is intended by the legislature to be cast in the widest terms and consequently has to be liberally construed as in this case.
11. Accordingly, the defendants shall now issue demand notice to the consumer/claimant within a period of fifteen days, where after, on deposit of charges of installation by the claimant, the electricity connection shall be installed at the claimant's premises within a period of 15 days restraining myself to grant damages for mental torture and agony as there is no medically recognized psychiatric illness medical disorder slip from recognized medical practitioner, hence, there is no liability for emotional distress or grief. However, the defendants shall pay legal expenses to the claimant Rs.10000/- as they have unnecessarily dragged him in this litigation. And they shall also pay local commissioner's fee Rs.1500/- already born by the claimant, total Rs.11500/- to the claimant. The non compliance of the order, shall be dealt with u/s 32(2) PCPA 2005. The claim is disposed of accordingly. File be consigned to the record room after its due completion.