BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
Complaint No.: 160 of 2014.
Date of Institution: 5.6.2014.
Date of Decision: 21.8.2015.
Laal Chand son of Shri Khali Ram alias Khalali Ram, resident of village Rivasa Dhani, tehsil tosham, district Bhiwani.
….Complainant.
Versus.
- Dakshini Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. through its Chairman/President Hisar.
- The Executive Engineer, “OP” City Division, DHBVNL, Bhiwani.
- The Sub Divisional Officer, “OP” City Division No.2, Dakshini Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., Tosham, District Bhiwani.
…...Respondents.
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTIONS 12 AND 13 OF
THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
Sitting: - Shri Balraj Singh, Member
Smt. Ansuya Bishnoi, Member,
Present: Shri M.S.Mehran, Advocate, for the complainant.
Shri K.R.Sangwan, Advocate for respondents.
O R D E R
The case of the complainant in brief, is that he is having an electricity connection bearing No.RDI-0278 in his shop and has been making payment of electricity charges regularly, hence he is consumer qua respondents. The complainant further alleged that the Ops have issued a bill in the month of March, 2014 amounting to Rs.17092/- on account of sundry. The complainant further alleged that on receipt of above said bill he visited the office of respondents and requested to rectify the same but they did not pay any heed. The complainant further alleged that due to 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 for seeking compensation by way of filing the present complaint.
2. Respondents on appearance filed written statement alleging therein that the premises of the complainant were checked by the Nigam and it was found that the complainant using excess load against the sanction load as the sanctioned load was 3 KWs whereas he was using 4.584 KWs. It is submitted that the complainant was also found giving electricity supply to his son Manoj in the adjoining house. The checking report was prepared which bears the signatures of the complainant. So, the complainant was charged penalty for using excess load for a sum of Rs.17092/- and he is liable to deposit the same with the Nigam. Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops and the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.
3. Both the parties filed their duly sworn affidavits to prove their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties at length.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and having gone through the material available on the record, we are of the considered view that the complaint of the complainant is genuine and deserves to be accepted. It is admitted fact that the complainant is having an electricity connection bearing account No.RDI-0278. The sole contention of the Ld. Counsel for the Ops is that premises of the complainant were checked by the Nigam and it was found that the complainant using excess load against the sanction load as the sanctioned load was 3 KWs whereas he was using 4.584 KWs. He further argued that the complainant was also found giving electricity supply to his son Manoj in the adjoining house and as such he was charged penalty for using excess load for a sum of Rs.17092/- and he is liable to deposit the same with the Nigam In our view, this plea of the Ld. counsel for the Ops has no substance at all because the respondents have miserably failed to produce any cogent and convincing evidence to prove their version. The respondents in their written statement admitted that complainant was also found giving electricity supply to his son Manoj in the adjoining house but from the perusal of record no photographs in this regard has been produced by the respondents to prove their version. Moreover, the respondents have failed to issue notice prior to adding the excess load consumption charges of Rs.17092/- in the account of the complainant. Even otherwise also the respondents have failed to join the independent witness of the locality to prove that the complainant was found using excess load against the sanction load. Moreover, the respondents alleged that at the time of checking the complainant was found excess load against the sanctioned load dishonestly and giving the supply to his son Manoj but they have failed to produce the wire etc. i.e. case property to prove this fact.
Hence, in view of the circumstances mentioned above, checking report dated 13.9.2012 and bill issued in the month of March, 2014 are declared illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and against the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and these are hereby set aside. Therefore, the complaint of the complainant is hereby allowed with costs and the respondents are directed:-
1. To refund the penalty amount if any deposited by the complainants along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of deposit till its realization.
2. To pay Rs. 2200/- as litigation charges.
Accordingly, the present complaint is hereby disposed off. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 21.8.2015.
(Ansuya Bishnoi) (Balraj Singh)
Member. Member
District Consumer Disputes District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani. Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
