Delhi

North East

CC/64/2020

Sh. Sanjay Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

B.S.E.S Yamuna Power Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

12 Oct 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No.64/20

In the matter of:

 

	Sh. Sanjay Kumar, S/o Late Ram Saran, R/o C-70 L, Gali No. 1 Mukand Vihar, Karawal Nagar, Delhi 94	Complainant
	Versus
1.       2.	BSES Yamuna Power Ltd., Shakti Kiran Building, Karkardooma, Delhi 110032   BSES Yamuna Power Ltd., Office of DGM(Business), Division- Karawal Nagar, 66KV Grid Station, Bhagirathi, Near Gokul Puri Police Station, New Delhi 110094	Opposite Parties

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:         JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                         DATE OF ORDER  :

20.11.2020 03.08.2023 12.10.2023

 

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

 

ORDER

 

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35  of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Case of the Complainant

1. The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that the Complainant is having an electricity connection vide CA-No-101596799 in the house of the Complainant. Opposite Party supplied the electricity to the Complainant and Complainant also paid the electricity bills regularly. It is his case that in the month of October and November, the Complainant had consumed 107 units and 141 units in 30 days i.e. from 07.10.2019 to 06.11.2019 and 06.11.2019 to 06.12.2019 respectively and the Opposite Party sent  electricity bills for the said months of Rs. 10/-. It is his case that in the month of December, Opposite Party sent electricity bill of Rs. 6,327.72/- by stating that the Complainant had consumed 1023.84 units in 39 days i.e. from 06.12.2019 to 14.01.2020. After that Opposite Party also sent a false bill for the month of January 2020 for Rs. 7,459.27/- by stating that the Complainant had consumed 1101 units in 29 days i.e. from 14.01.2020 to 12.02.2020. Complainant stated that every month he consumed the unit less than 300 so how he can consume 2124 units in the month of December and January. After that the Complainant visited the office of the Opposite Party No. 2 and informed them verbally about the said false bills. After that the Opposite Party No. 2 gave the assurance to the Complainant for rectification of the said bills and to send the correct bills in next succeeding months. On 03.07.2020, the Opposite Party No. 2 sent a notice to the Complainant for making the payment of arrears of Rs. 14,960/- within 15 days after receipt of the notice otherwise the process of the disconnecting the electricity supplied shall be initiated. It is his case that after receiving the said notice, on 22.07.2020 Complainant made a written complaint to the Opposite Party No. 1 through speed post but Opposite Party No. 1 neither replied nor complied the said complaint. On 17.11.2020, Opposite Parties threatened the Complainant for disconnecting the electricity supply if the bills were not paid by the Complainant within 15 days. Hence, this shows the deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Parties. Complainant has prayed for rectification of the bills dated 15.01.2020 and 13.02.2020 and also restraint the Opposite Parties for disconnecting the electricity supply of the Complainant. 

Case of the Opposite Parties

2. The Opposite Parties contested the case and filed their common written statement. It is stated that the complaint filed before this Forum is not maintainable as under the provisions of Indian Electricity Act, 2003. The complaint can be made before CGRF or Ombudsman. It is stated that electricity connection is installed at the premises of the Complainant. It is stated that the bills in question are based on actual consumption and there is no mistake in the said bills. It is stated that on 13.02.2020, Complainant had requested for testing on meter and on his request meter was tested at the site on 21.02.2020. During the said testing it was found that accuracy of the meter was within the permissible limit. Therefore, on the basis of the meter testing report, the revision of the bills is not possible. It is also stated that meter was tested in the presence of Mr. Sushil Chauhan, representative of the Complainant. It is stated that the complaint is without any merit and the same may be dismissed.

Rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Parties

3. The Complainant did not file any rejoinder to the written statement filed by the Opposite Parties.

Evidence of the Complainant

4. The Complainant in support of his complaint filed his affidavit wherein he has supported the averments made in the complaint.

Evidence of the Opposite Party

5. To support their case Opposite Parties have filed affidavit of Shri Shiv Shankar Sharma, Commercial Officer, wherein, he has supported the case of the Opposite Parties as mentioned in the written statement.

Arguments & Conclusion

6. We have heard the Ld. Counsels for the parties and we have also perused the file. The case of the Complainant is that he has received two electricity bills. It is his case that the consumption shown in the said bills for the month of December and January. It is his case that the said bills shows 1023.84 units and 1101 units electricity consumption on the higher side whereas the Complainant did not use such amount of electricity. On the other hand, the case of the Opposite Parties is that the bills in question are correct and the same are based on actual consumption shown by the electricity meter. It is the case of the Opposite Parties that on the request of the Complainant the electricity meter was tested in the presence of the representative of the Complainant and during inspection, it was found that the accuracy of the meter was within permissible limits.
7. It is important to be noted that the fact of testing the meter in the presence of representative of the Complainant has been concealed by the Complainant. The Opposite Parties have stated in their written statement that the meter testing was done on the request of the Complainant and during inspection the accuracy of the electricity meter was found within the permissible limits. The Complainant has not filed rejoinder to the written statement filed by the Opposite Parties, therefore, it is clear that the Complainant has not controverted the case of the Opposite Parties regarding the testing of meter and also regarding the accuracy of the electricity meter and also regarding the stand of the Opposite Parties that the electricity bills in question were based on actual consumption. Further it is also important to note that the Complainant has filed his affidavit in evidence and perusal of the said evidence/affidavit shows that the Complainant has not controverted the said facts even in his evidence. The Complainant also did not lead any evidence that the electricity meter installed in his premises is fast or that the meter is not proper.
8. In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the Complainant has failed to prove its case and on the other hand the Opposite Party has prove that the electricity meter installed in the premises of the Complainant is working properly and the bills in question are based on actual consumption. Hence, we do not see any merit in the complaint and the same is dismissed.
9. Order announced on 12.10.2023.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost

File be consigned to Record Room.

(Anil Kumar Bamba)		(Surinder Kumar Sharma)
(Member)		(President)