DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATIALA. Complaint No. CC/10/307 of 29.4.2010 Decided on: 19.10.2010 Dinesh Kumar Mongia son of Sh.Jagdish Chand Mongia Resident of H.No.2451,Rajpura Town, District Patiala. -----------Complainant Versus 1. Asstt.Engineer, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Rajpura. 2. Chairman/Secretary Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.,Patiala. ----------Opposite parties. Complaint under Sections 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act. QUORUM Sh.Inderjit Singh, President Sh.Amarjit Singh Dhindsa,Member Smt.Neelam Gupta, Member Present: For the complainant: Sh.Deepak Madan, Advocate For opposite parties: Smt.Puja Puri, Advocate ORDER SH.INDERJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT Complainant Dinesh Kumar Mongia has brought this consumer complaint under Sections 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 as amended up to date ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the opposite parties fully detailed and described in the head note of the complaint. 2. As per averments made in the complaint the case of the complainant is like this:- That complainant is the registered owner of the house No.2451 Rajpura Town, District Patiala wherein above domestic connection is installed and he is consuming supply, since he purchased house. That there is no liability of any kind upto the last/preceeding bill dated 20.2.2010.That now the current bill dated 18.4.2010 has been issued/sent for 614 units. The complainant does not dispute the current consumption of 614 units i.e. Rs.2347/- and charges thereto. He is ready to pay/deposit the chargeable amount for 614 units, as per rules and law, well in time of payment date. However, the amount in the current bill has been additioned wrongly to Rs.9550/-,while consumption charges for 614 units shown is 2347/-. Other amount is not explainable and is wrong, excessive, not recoverable, malafide. That opposite parties are out to malafidely and forcibly disconnect the supply, if payment not paid/deposited till 3.5.2010..That complainant went to the office of opposite parties but they did not listen to him and insisted that amount should be deposited first. That complainant has never been a defaulter, during the past whole period. Every bill has been deposited will in time. Nor there is any notice or explanation of wrong addition of huge amount in current bill. Services of opposite parties are deficient dishonest and unlawful too. Hence this complaint. 3. Notice of the complaint was given to the opposite parties, who appeared and filed a joint written reply contesting the claim of the complainant. It is admitted that the complainant is the consumer for the Power Corporation of the connection in dispute. That the complainant is the consumer of the connection bearing Account No.GF07/0051.Another connection was taken in the same premises by the consumer in the name of his father namely Sh.Jagdish Chand.The said connection of the consumer bearing account No.SF 01/1700 was disconnected due to non payment of the amount of Rs./9550/-.The concerned office of the Power Corporation has merely charged the amount of complainant’s father in the accounts of the complainant. The action has been taken as per provisions of Electricity Supply Code and Related matters Regulations,2007. That it has been specifically mentioned in Regulation No.29 as under:- “ A licensee may recover from a consumer any charges due to him in respect of the supply of electricity or for the provision of any meter, electric line or electric plan.” Similarly, Regulation 30.13 of the said code says as under:- “If a consumer vacates any premises to which electricity has been supplied by a licensee without paying all charges due from him in respect of such supply, or for the provision of an electricity meter, electric line or electrical plan, the licensee may refuse to give him supply at any other premises until he pays the amount due. However, the licensee will not be entitled to require payment of such amount from the next occupier of the premises”. So meaning thereby that the Board is taking the action as per rules. There is absolutely no illegality in any manner. It is denied that the demand of the opposite parties is illegal etc. There is no question of withdrawal of the demand. The issuing of the bills by the Board is an admitted fact. In fact, the complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands and has concealed the fact that he was in arrears of the amount relating to the connection as has been fully described above, which was in the name of his father namely Jagdish Chand.It is denied that the complainant has suffered in any manner. The complainant is neither entitled to any relief nor any compensation. The raising of demand from a consumer of the electricity consumed by the consumer does not amount to deficiency in service. The complainant is liable to make the payment of the amount which was standing against his father namely Jagdish Chand. All other averments made in the complaint have also been denied and have prayed that complaint be dismissed. 4. The parties in order to prove their case have tendered their respective evidence on the record. 5. The complainant has filed the written arguments. We have gone through the same and have also heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6. The case of complainant is that the current bill dated 18.4.2010 ,Ex.C4 issued by the opposite parties for 614 units and he raised no dispute for the same and became ready to pay the amount of the used electricity of 614 units as per rules and law. But the amount in the current bill has been additioned to Rs.9550/- while the consumption charges for 614 units are Rs.2347/-.The other shown and added amount is not explained that for which it has been added. The said added amount is totally wrong excessive not recoverable from him. 7. Whereas the case of opposite parties is that the complainant is the consumer of the connection bearing account No.P31 GF07/0051N.Another connection was taken in the same premises by the consumer in the name of his father Sh.Jagdish Chand. The said connection of the consumer bearing account No.SF01/1700 was disconnected due to the non payment of the amount of Rs.9550/-.The concerned office of the Power Corporation has merely charged the amount of complainant’s father in the accounts of the complainant. The action has been taken as per provisions of Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters Regulations 2007. The demand raised by them, is illegal. 8. We have considered the rival contentions of the parties. 9. The sole question which needs decision in this case is as to whether as per rules of the opposite parties the amount outstanding against one connection(account No.SF01/1700 in the name of Jagdish Chand) could be added in the bill of another connection even if the demand related to the same consumer. The complainant has challenged the demand of Rs.6879/- in bill,Ex.C4 dated 18.4.2010 under the Column Sundry charges made by the opposite parties which according to the complainant has been illegally added to his account. It is an admitted fact between the parties that the demand in dispute relates to another connection bearing account No.SF01/1700 in the name of Sh.Jagdish Chand and the same has been added to the account of the complainant in the bill,Ex.C4 dated 18.4.2010.As per rules of the opposite parties the amount outstanding against one connection can not be added in the bill of the another connection even if the demand relates to the same consumer. In the present case the demand relates to connection which is in the name of Jagdish Chand. The said could not be added to the account of the complainant. The demand made by the opposite parties to the connection which was in the name of Jagdish Chand, the said amount under the rules of the opposite parties as has not been denied by the learned counsel for the opposite parties could not be added to the account of the complainant. On this point we are supported by the authority Punjab State Electricity Board Vs. Garjit Kaur 2004(1)CLT 622. 10. As a result we hold the demand to be unjustified amounting to deficiency of service and quash the same with Rs.1000/-as costs of the complaint to be paid by the opposite parties to the complainant within a period of one month from the receipt of the copy of the order. The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record. Pronounced. Dated:19.10.2010. President Member Member
| | Mr. Amarjit Singh Dhindsa, Member | HONABLE MR. Inderjit Singh, PRESIDENT | Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member | | 
