District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No.693/2022.
Date of Institution:26.12.2022.
Date of Order: 25.10.2024.
Akshay Kumar S/o Sh. Bahadur Singh r/o VPO-Seekri, Ballabgarh, Faridabad, Haryana – 121004.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Sub Division F33-S/U Ballabgarh, Division-Faridabad, Haryana (Through Sub-Divisional Officer DHBVNL Ballabgarh, Faridabad).
…Opposite party……
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: Shri Naveen Sharma, counsel for the Complainant.
Shri N.K.Garg,, counsel for opposite party .
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant was a consumer of DHBVNL having a sanctioned load of 1 KW bearing account NO. KK12-1686-P, meter No. 279220133. The meter was installed in august 2016 and the complainant was paying the electricity bill of the units generated for the two consecutive billing cycles. After depositing two consecutive bill amount the opposite party started giving average consumptions bill from November 2016. The complainant was regularly paying average unit bills to the opposite party and the last paid bill of average unit was Rs.30427/- dated 19.01.2021 . After paying such amount to the opposite party they again started issuing average consumptions bill and also added amount which the complainant had already paid in previous bills. When the consumer/complainant approached the opposite party to deduct amount which he had already paid in previous bills issued by the opposite party, they clearly refused to deduct the amount already paid by complainant. The officials of the DHBVNL did not give any specific reason that why they were not deducting the amount already paid by the complainant. The opposite party again issued electricity bill for average unit for Rs.59244/- dated 27.09.22 without deducting earlier paid amount.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) deduct/adjust the earlier paid amount from the current consumption bill of the complainant.
b) not to disconnect the electricity connection of complainant and to furnish details as to why the earlier paid amount had not been deducted from the latest bill.
c) stay the recovery of bill of Rs.59244/- dated 27.09.2022 till the final outcome of the present complaint.
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 ahd taken non domestic connection whereas the unit in question was a commercial shop and was being used for commercial purpose. It was well within the knowledge of complainant that meter was defective and was not working since long time as such meter was not showing proper consumption and unit. The complainant was asked by the official of the answering opposite party to get the meter tested in lab so that the condition of the meter and its accuracy might be ascertain and if the meter was found defective the same might be changed and after proper reading. The bill which was being given on the average consumption basis might be corrected but the consumer/complainant was keeping silence and using the consumption on commercial base and he simply deposited Rs.30,427/- on 19.1.2021 only previously and there after he never deposited any bill thereby causing financial loss to the opposite party. It was submitted that the DHBVNL was an electricity company owned and controlled by Govt. of Haryana and carries Public Importance function of distribution and maintenance of electricity supply in south part of State of Haryana therefore DHBVNL was an instrumentality/agency of government of Haryana and as such was a stage under Article 12 of the constitution of India as such exemption u/s 80(2) CPC was required and the said exemption application had not been filed. Opposite party 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.
To establish his case, the complainant has led in his evidence Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Akshay, Ex.C-1 – bill, Ex.C-2 bill issue dated 26.07.2023.
On the other hand counsel for the opposite party strongly agitated and opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite party Ex.RW1/A – affidavit of Shri Vinay Singh Sikarwar, SDO, DHBVNL Sub Division, F-33, S/U Ballabgarh. Ex.R-1 – bill dated 29.11.2023, Ex.R-2 – ledger account statement, Ex.R-3 – notice for checking of defective meter in M & P lab, Ex.R-4 – circular dated 03.07.2017.
5. In this case, the complaint was filed with the prayer a) deduct/adjust the earlier paid amount from the current consumption bill of the complainant. b)not to disconnect the electricity connection of complainant and to furnish details as to why the earlier paid amount had not been deducted from the latest bill. c) stay the recovery of bill of Rs.59244/- dated 27.09.2022 till the final outcome of the present complaint..
6. During the course of arguments, counsel for the complainant has placed on record bill dated 09.11.2021.
7. As per order dated 22.02.2023, the interim application was allowed , subject to deposit of 40% of the disputed amount within one week from today. After receiving the above said amount form the coplainant opposite party is directed not to disconnect the electricity supply of the complainant bearing account NO. KK12-1686-P, Meter No. 279220133.
As per the order dated 22.02.2023, the complainant has deposited 40% of disputed amount. The complainant led in his evidence affidavit of Akshay Kumar Vide Ex.CW1/A and Ex.C1 to C2. On the other hand, opposite party led in their evidence Ex.RW1/A – affidavit of Shri Vinay Singh Sikarwar, SDO, DHBVNL and Ex.R-1 to R-4.
8. After going through the evidence led by both the parties, the allegation was that it was a commercial connection. This Commission has no jurisdiction. During the course of arguments, the counsel for the complainant has placed on record the original bill dated 09.11.2021. The connection of load is only 1 KW. It is a domestic connection with plot Khota (kacha room). Counsel for the complainant also made the allegation upon the opposite party that opposite party has destroyed the electricity meter thereself.
9. Keeping in view of the above submissions as well as the evidence led by the parties, the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is allowed. Opposite party is directed to over haul the account of the complainant and adjust the paid amount which was paid by the complainant. Opposite party is also directed not to charge surcharge of the disputed period from the complainant. Opposite party is further directed to charge only the consumed unit charges from the complainant as well as up date the account of the complainant and also issued the latest bill, if any. Opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation for causing mental agony & harassment alongwith Rs.2200/- 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. Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on:25.10.2024 (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.
