District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No. 27/2022.
Date of Institution:18.01.2022.
Date of Order:12.04.2023.
M/s. Keshav Motors, 18/1, Mathura Road, Faridabad through its Proprietor Shri Abhishek Diwan.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam through its XEN (OP), DHBVNL, Sector-23, Faridabad.
2. Sub Divisional Officer (Operation) sub Division East, Old Faridabad, DHBVN, Sector-16, Faridabad.
…Opposite parties
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana………….Member.
PRESENT: Sh. Ajay Yadav , counsel for the complainant.
Sh.Manish Kumar Raghav , counsel for opposite parties
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant had applied for electricity connection with the opposite party in the year 19911 for running the above said petrol pump under the name and style of M/s. Keshav Motors, was getting the supply of electricity form DHBVNL since 1991. The electric meter vides old account NO. PL41-0003 ( New Account No. 0699390000) with a sanction load of 36 KW had been installed in the name of the complainant firm at 18/1, Mathura Road, Faridabad. The electric meter in question had been functioning properly since the date of its installation till date and the above said electric meter were installed in the year of 1991 at the complainant firm premises. The complainant had been regularly depositing electricity bills of the said connection as per the meter reading and bills raised by the opposite party’s time to time and they had paid the consumption bills upto 30th November, 2021. In all the electricity bills were raised by the opposite parties since 1991 till date the status of the meter shown OK. The complainant firm had applied for extension of sanction load from 36 KW to 50 KW with the opposite parties in the month of June 2018 against the electric meter/connection vide account No. 0699390000 and after getting inspection of the premises of the complainant and checking of the load, the opposite parties had extended the load from 36 KW to 50 KW under non domestic supply category in the month of June 2018 and since then the complainant had been regularly paying the consumption charges of electricity to the opposite parties as per the meter reading and bills raised by the opposite party’s time to time. The electric meter of the complainant was also checked by the Vigilance team of the opposite parties firstly on 15.4.2014 and second one on 13.12.2016 but no dispensary was found by the Vigilance team. To the utter surprise of complainant, the complainant was faced with the demand of sundry charges/allowance amount of Rs.3,14,729/- abruptly vide bill NO. 069938189327 dated 11.01.2022, which was payable on or before 21.01.2022, in which the opposite party No.2 had illegally, unlawfully and arbitrarily added/transfer the amount of Rs.2,72,673/- with surcharge on account of sundry charges/allowance without any right and authorized, jurisdiction and power. After receiving the impugned notice vide bill NO. 069938189327 dated 11.01.2022 for Rs. 3,14,729/- which included an amount of Rs.2,72,673/- as sundry charges, complainant requested to opposite party No.2 to withdraw the alleged above said amount form the electric account of the complainant and the opposite party No.2 asked the complainant that wrong tariff was charged by the opposite parties as per their internal revenue audit department found in their audit and also intimate that the electric supply running on NDS but the S/Division billed on LT Industrial category due to which less bill raised to the consumer/complainant, hence a sum of Rs.2,72,673/- was payable from 12/15 to 7/2021 and also provide the photocopy of memo NO 133 dated 06.08.2021. Thereafter the complainant approached and requested opposite party NO.1 XEN (OP), Faridabad to withdraw the alleged amount added in bill dated 11.01.2022 from the electric account of the complainant and to withdraw the above said memo NO. 133 dated 06.08.2021 but firstly opposite party No.1 and its concerned staff went on deferring the matter on one pretext or the other and finally on 15.01.022 but also reiterated their threats to recover the impugned amount of sundry charges by way of disconnect of electric supply, hence this was the date when final cause of action had arisen in favour of the complainant against the opposite party which necessitated the institution of the present complaint.. The complainant was always ready to pay actual consumption charges i.e. Rs.33,000/- approx. to the opposite party against the bill No.069938189327 dated 11.01.2022 of Rs.3,14,729/- but the opposite parties were not accepting monthly consumption charges. The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:
a) withdraw the impugned memo NO. 133 dated 06.08.2021 and to
withdraw impugned amount of Rs.2,72,673/- alongwith surcharge added in bill dated 11.01.2022 of A/c No. 0699390000 forthwith being illegal null and void abinitio.
b) not to disconnect the electricity supply and meter connection bearing A/c No. 0699390000.
c) not to recover the impugned amount of Rs.2,72,673/- on account of sundry charges from the complainant by forcibly, illegally and by adopting any coercive method and in any manner whatsoever till pending final disposal of this complaint.
d) pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
e) pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite party put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that the complainant had applied for electricity connection with the opposite party in the year 1991 for running the above said petrol pump under the name and style of M/s. Keshav Motors. It was further submitted that the opposite parties had installed electric meter vide old account No. PL41-0003 (New Account NO. 0699390000) with a sanction load of 36 KW in the complainant firm. Opposite parties denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties–DHBVNL with the prayer to: a) withdraw the impugned memo NO. 133 dated 06.08.2021 and to withdraw impugned amount of Rs.2,72,673/- alongwith surcharge added in bill dated 11.01.2022 of A/c No. 0699390000 forthwith being illegal null and void abinitio. b) not to disconnect the electricity supply and meter connection bearing A/c No. 0699390000. c) not to recover the impugned amount of Rs.2,72,673/- on account of sundry charges from the complainant by forcibly, illegally and by adopting any coercive method and in any manner whatsoever till pending final disposal of this complaint. d) pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . e) pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Abhishek Diwan, Proprietor of M/s. Keshav Motors, 18/1, Mathura Road, Faridabad, Ex.C-1 – Registration certificate, Ex.C-1 NO objection Certificate, Ex.C-3 to C-7– bills dated 12.01.2014, 17.04.2018, 18.07.2018, 05.02.2020 & 18.01.2016, Ex.C-8 – Bill receipt dated 25.01.2016,, Ex.C-9 – Checking report,, Ex.C-10 – Checking report,, Ex.C-11 – bill dated 11.01.2022, Ex.C-12 - Memo No. 133 dated 06.08.2021, Ex.C-13 – photocopy of demand draft,, Ex.C-14 – bill dated 14.03.2022.
On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties strongly agitated and opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite parties Ex.RW-1/A – affidavit of Shri Manish Sanwal, SDO. Sub Division East, DHBVNL, Old Faridabad, Ex.R-1 – Memo No. 133 dated 06.08.2021, Ex.R-2 – Wrong Tariff report.
6. It is evident from the report of SDO “OP” Sub Division East, DHBVNL, Old Faridabad vide memo No.133 dated 06.08.2021 (Ex.R-1), this is the recovery of NDS 50 KW but as per the complaint the connection of 36KV (Sanction load) and this recovery is from 12/15 to 7/2021 of Rs.2,72,673/-. On the other counsel for complainant stated that as per the Electricity Act u/s 56, opposite party can recover only for Max. last 2 years.. He further stated that 25% of the amount has been deposited by the complainant on 14.3.2022.
7. After going through the evidence led by the parties, the Commission is of the opinion that the Revocery vide memo No. 133 dated 6.8.2021 for Rs.2,72,673/- is illegal. Hence, the complaint is allowed. Opposite parties are directed to over haul the account of the complainant and charge only recovery maximum2 years from the issuing of the bills. Opposite parties are also directed to adjust the amount which was deposited by the complainant as per the order dated 14.03.2022 passed by the DCDRC, Faridabad. Opposite party is also directed to withdraw the impugned memo No. 133 dated 06.08.2021 and to withdraw impugned amount of Rs.2,72,673/- alongwith surcharge added in bill dated 11.01.2022 of A/c No. 0699390000 forthwith being null and void . Opposite parties are directed that after overhauling the account of the complainant a demand notice be given to the complainant to deposit the blance payment (if any) and is restrained to disconnect the conneciton of the complainant bearing A/c No. 0699390000. After receving the notice form the opposite parties, complainant is directed to deposit the amount within15 dates. The complainant is also directed to pay the current bills regularly. Opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.5500/- as compensation for causing mental agony & harassment alognwith Rs.5500/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 12.04.2023 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
