BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.255 of 2014
DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 28.08.2014
DATE OF ORDER: 09.11.2016
Smt. Prem Devi wife of Sh. Hoshiyar Singh son of Sh. Maan Singh, resident of New Uttam Nagar, Jeetuwala Johar, Bhiwani, Tehsil & District Bhiwani, A/C No. XDID-3638.
……………Complainant.
VERSUS
- D.H.B.V.N.L., Hisar, through its Managing Director, D.H.B.V.N.L. Vidyut Nagar, Hisar.
- Executive Engineer, D.H.B.V.N.L., Bhiwani.
- S.D.O/A.G.M., Sub Urban, Sub Division No. 2, D.H.B.V.N.L., Bhiwani.
………….. Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT.
BEFORE :- Shri Rajesh Jindal, President.
Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member.
Mrs. Sudesh, Member.
Present:- Shri Rakesh Tanwar, Advocate for complainant.
Shri Rajesh Punia, Advocate for the respondents.
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
Brief facts of the present complaint are that the complainant is consumer qua respondents having electricity connection bearing No. XDID-3638 and has been making payment of electricity charges regularly. It is alleged that on 23.06.2014 the official of the Ops visited the premises of the complainant and they inspected the electric meter duly installed inside the house of the complainant and after finding all the things related to electric meter O.K. prepared a report LL1 dated 23.06.2014 mentioning therein that no theft found at the time of checking. It is alleged that complainant received a electric bill No. 5522 dated 21.07.2014 amounting to Rs. 77,645/- which was issued by the Ops for the month of July 2014 and bill old units were mentioned as 6319 and new units were mentioned as 16512. On 20.08.2014 the complainant moved an application before OP no. 3 for correcting the bill amount but no action was taken. The complainant alleged that the Ops were also threatened the complainant that in the event of failure of depositing all the electric bill dated 21.07.2014 i.e. Rs. 77,645/-, her electric supply would be disconnected. The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the respondents, she 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 she had to file the present complaint.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed written statement alleging therein that on 3.12.2014 our technical staff consisting of ALM Rajender checked the electric meter in the premises of the complainant and found 17156 reading and so, the meter was running properly. It is submitted that as per the reading month wise 7/14 to 03.12.2014 the electric was consumed and the meter was giving the readings properly. It is submitted that in the month of July, 2014, the bill was of Rs. 77645/- and September, 2014, it was 78640/- and in the month of November, 14, it was of Rs. 82,179/- and the complainant did not deposit the amount of bill thereafter. 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 her case, the complainant has tendered into evidence documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-5 alongwith supporting affidavit.
4. In reply thereto, the counsel for opposite parties has tendered into evidence documents Annexure R-1 to Annexure R-3 alongwith 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 complainant received a bill no. 5522 dated 21.07.2014 amounting to Rs. 77645/- for the consumption of 10193 units. As per LL-1 report of OP the complainant is having a connected load of 1.403 K.W. Prior of this bill the complainant had not received the bill dated 18.05.2014 for the consumption of 119 units only which was paid by the complainant. The complainant is regularly paying the electricity bills.
7. Learned counsel for the Ops reiterated the contents of the reply. He submitted that the meter of the complainant is running properly as the ALM of the OP check the meter on 03.12.2014. His report is Annexure R-1.
8. In the light of the pleadings and arguments of the parties, we have examined the relevant material on the record. The OP has produced the statement of consumption of units of the applicant as Annexure R-2, wherein the consumption of units are between 200 and 300 for every bill issued by the complainant subsequent to 21.07.2014. The OP could not give any justification for the consumption of 10193 unit by the complainant, who is having domestic connection with a small load. Even the OP has not found any excess load during the checking and issue of LL-1 Annexure R-3. The contention of the complainant that the meter has shown the excess reading due to the technical fault cannot be ruled out. Considering the facts of the case, we allow the complaint of the complainant. The Ops are directed to re-issue the bill for the month of 21.07.2014 on the basis of six months average. The Ops are further directed not to claim any surcharge in the said bill and the complainant is directed to pay the said bill. No order as to costs.
Certified copies of the order be sent to both the parties, free of costs and file be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated:09.11.2016.
(Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Anamika Gupta) (Sudesh)
Member. Member.
