Haryana

StateCommission

A/525/2018

UHBVNL - Complainant(s)

Versus

AMARNATH - Opp.Party(s)

B.S.NEGI

22 Feb 2019

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

         

                                                         First Appeal No.525 of 2018

Date of Institution:25.04.2018

                                                               Date of Decision: 22.02.2019

 

1.      Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, through its Managing Director, Shakti Bhawan, Sector-6, Panchkula.

2.      Executive Engineer, UHBVNL, Yamuna Nagar.

3.      S.D.O./A.E.E., UHBVNL, I.T.I., Sub-Division, Yamuna Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhri, Distt. Yamuna Nagar.

…..Appellants

Versus

 

Amar Nath s/o Sh. Sh. Tirlok Chand Mehta, R/o H.No.205, Sarojini
Colony, Yamuna Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhri, Distt. Yamuna Nagar.

                                      …..Respondent

 

 

CORAM:             Mr. Ram Singh Chaudhary, Judicial Member

                             Mrs. Manjula, Member                                                                                                         

Present:              Mr.B.S.Negi, Advocate for the appellants alongwith concerned SDO in person.

Mr.Amar Nath respondent in person.

 

                                                   O R D E R

RAM SINGH CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

          Delay in filing the appeal is condoned for the reasons stated in the application filed for condonation of delay.

2.      The present appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 30.01.2018 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri (In short “District Forum”) vide which the complaint instituted by the complaint was disposed of with direction to the Ops to overhaul the account of the complainant for the period 8/2015 and 9/2015 by taking the average of 565 units as base as consumed by the complainant w.e.f. 12/2015 to 8/2017 and further Ops were directed to issue the fresh bill to the complainant after overhauling the account of the complainant.

3.      The brief facts of the case are that complainant was having electricity connection bearing account No. Y46F-030567P and has been paying the bills regularly.   On 27.07.2015, the O.Ps. issued illegal bill of Rs.30,674/- showing the consumption of 4044 units.  He requested the Ops to correct the bill, but, the Ops did not listen the genuine request of the complainant.

4.      Notice being issued. Opposite parties (O.Ps.) contested the complaint and  it has been alleged in the written version that   complainant  meter of the complainant was checked on 16.06.2005. The meter was sent to M&T lab for checking of its internal circuit, accuracy and genuineness and the same was checked in the presence of complainant.  It was found that accuracy was within limit.  The bill of Rs.30,674/- was correct and legal.  Preliminary objections regarding  maintainability of complaint, accruing cause of action etc. were also raised and requested to dismiss the complaint.

5.      After hearing both the parties, learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Yamuna Nagar  (In Short “District Forum”) dispose of the complaint mentioned above vide impugned order dated 30.01.2018.

6.      Feeling aggrieved therefrom, O.Ps.-appellants have preferred this appeal.

7.      The argument have been advanced by Mr.B.S.Negi,  the learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr.Amar Nath respondent in person. With their kind assistance the entire original record as well as that of the appellate record has been properly perused and examined.

8.      The basic dispute between the parties is about the consumption of the average units.  To rule out any possibility of recording a higher consumption of units,  the check meter of the complainant-respondent was sent to the lab laboratory for deciding  the consumption of units and   O.Ps. submitted the report that the electric meter is in order as far as the consumption of the units are concerned.  Once the meter has been found in order, the possibility of recording of consumption of higher electrical units does not arise.  Since the complainant happens to be a senior citizen of India, he was called by the department to settle the disputes by giving him the benefit of the scheme to waive off the electric charges to the extent of 50% amount of the disputed bill, which the complainant intentionally did not join the proceedings before the appropriate authorities to get the concession to the extent of 50% amount of the disputed bill.  Further he has pressed to make the payment of the amount as per the directions issued by the learned District Forum, Yamuna Nagar.  Once the electric meter has been found to be in order, the actual consumption has been shown in the electric bills issued from time to time.  There was no occasion for the learned District forum to direct the complainant to make the payment of the particular units on average basis.  Hence, this opinion taken by the learned District forum does not qualify the legal scrutiny of this Commission. Hence, the impugned order dated 30.01.2018 is set aside and appeal is allowed and complaint is dismissed.

 

February 22nd, 2019 Manjula              Ram Singh Chaudhary,                                            Member              Judicial Member                                                        Addl.Bench          Addl.Bench               

S.K.