BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.212 of 2014

DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 1.8.2014

DATE OF ORDER: 31.8.2015

Geeta Devi wife of Shri Narender Kumar, resident of village Dhareru, tehsil and district Bhiwani.                                  ……………Complainant.

VERSUS

1. The Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. Vidyut Nagar, Hisar through its MD.
2. The Executive Engineer, Sub Urban, Sub Division, DHBVNL, Charkhi Dadri, district Bhiwani.
3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sub Division, DHBVNL, Sanjarwas, district Bhiwani.                                    ………….. Opposite Parties.

BEFORE :-   Shri Rajesh Jindal, President

          Shri Balraj Singh, Member

                    Smt. Ansuya Bishnoi, Member,        

Present:- Shri Mukesh Gulia, Adv. for complainant.

     Shri R.S.Sharma, Advocate, for the respondents.

ORDER:-

Rajesh Jindal, President:

                    Brief facts of the present complaint are that she applied for domestic connection and had deposited a sum of Rs.1010/- vide receipt No.000423/02 dated 6.11.2013. The complainant further alleged that after completion of all the formalities they have released the electric connection in her favour by Tirloki and Amit. The complainant further alleged that after installing the electricity meter the above said officials have demanded a sum of Rs.500/- but she refused to pay the same.  The complainant further alleged that the respondents have issued a letter No.2965 dated 11.6.2013 vide which they have demanded a sum of Rs.72,000/- on account of defaulting amount to the above said premises on account of electricity meter account No.DD-108 which was in the name of Dhanpat son of Ami Lal stating therein that the complainant had taken the electricity connection illegally  in the defaulting premises. The complainant further alleged that the respondents have released the connection in the premises after properly verifying the spot. The complainant further alleged that she visited the office of the Ops several times and requested to withdraw the above said amount but they did not pay any heed. The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the respondents, he had to suffer mental agony, physical harassment and financial losses. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of respondents and as such he had to file the present complaint.

2.                 On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed written statement alleging therein the complainant had received the connection by playing fraud. At the time of verification the complainant put false signature of Amit Kumar to prove this fact that the site in question is not a defaulting one because the premises in question is a defaulting one and same was possessed by Dhanpat having connection No.DD-108 who is father-in-law of complainant and had not paid his electricity bills regularly. Hence, an amount of Rs.72731/- were due against the premises in question. It is alleged that the above said Dhanpat had filed a consumer complaint in respect of disputed bill and the same was dismissed vide order dated 16.10.2009. So, the premises in question are defaulter and as per rules no fresh connection can be released against the defaulting premises without clearing the outstanding dues in advances.  Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops and as such, complaint of the complainant is hereby dismissed with costs.

3.                          In order to make out his case, the complainant has placed on record Annexure C1 Photostat copy receipt, Annexure C2 Photostat copy of application, Annexure C3 Photostat copy of declaration, Annexure C4 & C5 Photostat copy of receipts, Annexure C6 Photostat copy of ration card, Annexure C7 Photostat copy of affidavit, Annexure C8 Photostat copy of certificate, Annexure C9 & C10 Photostat copy of affidavits, Annexure C11 Photostat copy of checking report along with supporting affidavit.

4.                In reply thereto, the opposite parties have placed on record Annexure R1 & R2 Photostat copies of application dated 11.11.2013 and dated 19.11.2013, Annexure R3 Photostat copy of account ledger and Annexure C4 Photostat copy of sale circular along with supporting affidavit.

5.                 We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

6.

                    Learned counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that the Ops installed the electricity connection at the premises of the complainant on 6.11.2013, but since the installation of the electricity connection no bill for the consumption of electricity has been issued by the Ops.

7.                The counsel for the Ops reiterated the contents of their reply. He submitted that the complainant manipulated the signature of Amit Kumar, ALM and the premises of the complainant where the electricity connection has been installed is defaulting premises and as per rules no fresh connection can be released in the defaulting premises.

8.                The complainant has specifically denied the allegations of the Ops regarding manipulation of the signature of ALM Amit Kumar and submitted that Amit Kumar, ALM had demanded Rs.500/- as illegal gratification from the complainant and the complainant has refused to pay the same. The counsel for the complainant contended that the premises of the complainant are separate from the premises of defaulting person Dhanpat, who is father-in-law of the complainant. In support of his contention he referred the certificate of Sarpanch Annexure C8, Affridavit of Dhanpat Annexure C10 and affidavit of complainant Annexure C9.

9.                The Ops have not produced the affidavit of ALM Amit Kumar to prove its allegations regarding the manipulation of the signature, nor the affidavit of any official who had verified the spot regarding defaulting premises. The Ops have failed to adduce any cogent and corroborate evidence in support of their contention. On the other side the complainant has produced the certificate of Sarpanch that the complainant is living separate from his father-in-law Dhanpat, also affidavit of Dhanpat, and copy of ration card where the name of Dhanpat is not mentioned.

10.              Taking in to account of every aspect of the case, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the Ops to issue the bills for the consumption of electricity since the installation of electricity connection to the complainant without any surcharge or penalty and the complainant is directed to pay the previous bills within three months from the date of issue of the bills. The Ops are further directed to issue current consumption bills regularly to the complainant. It is made clear that the Ops shall be at liberty to take for the recovery of its due against Dhanpat as per provision of law. No order as to costs.                 

Announced in open Forum.

Dated:31.8.2015.                                                 (Rajesh Jindal)

                                                                                President,   

                                                                      District Consumer Disputes

                                                                      Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

(Ansuya Bishnoi)),          (Balraj Singh),      

Member.                             Member.