District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No. 285/2020.
Date of Institution:01.09.2020.
Date of Order:02.05.2023.
Manohar Masih aged 59 years son of Shri H.R.Masih r/o House No. 116/2, Sunder Colony, Nangla road, Faridabad, Haryana through SPA holder by Ashish Masih Advocate son of Shri Manohar Masih aged 59 years r/o House No. 116/2, Sunder Colony, Nangla Road, Faridabad, Haryana.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, SDO(OP), Sub Division, No. F-24, Jawahar colony, Circle-1, Division NIT, Faridabad through its Sub Divisional Officer, NIT, 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: Sh. Himanshu Singhal , counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Rajiv Rana , counsel for opposite party.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the present complaint has been filed by the complainant through its SPA holder Shri Ashish Masih Advocate who is the son of complainant and well conversant with all the facts and contents of the present complaint. The complainant has been residing with his family members at the above said address for a long time peacefully and without any obstruction. The opposite party had installed a meter connection NO. 83938977 vide account No. 01941900000 in the name of the complainant at the above said premises. It was further submitted that in the month of February 2019, the opposite party had installed a new Electricity Digital meter replacing the old meter. The complainant had paid the electricity bill amount till January 2019 and no dues was pending towards the department of the opposite party. On 31.05.2019 the complainant received a message on his mobile from the department of opposite party for a bill of Rs.51184/-, immediately the complainant enquired about the message from the officials of the opposite party then officials of the opposite party told him that the bill regarding the above said connection for a period of 2016 to 2019 had been issued by the department of opposite party on the average basis, accordingly on the installation of new electricity meter it was checked and found that the complainant had paid Rs.51,184/- as a more amount to the department of the opposite party. So, the amount of Rs.51,184/- should be adjusted in upcoming bills till its clearance. It was further submitted that the amount of Rs.51,184/- had been adjusted by the department of the opposite party continuously till the bill for a period 28.05.2019 to 30.06.2020. It was further submitted that after adjusting the bill for a period of 12.05.2020 to 30.06.2020 an amount of Rs.13,855/- was also become due on the department of the opposite party. On 25.08.2020 the complainant had received a impugned bill for a sum of Rs.95,521/- for the period of 02.07.2020 to 25.08.2020 after adjusting the amount of Rs.13,855/-. After adjusting the amount of Rs.13,855/-. The complainant was utter surprised to see the amount mentioned in the impugned bill for a period of 02.07.2020 to 25.08.2020 and the last date of depositing the alleged bill was 04.09.2020. It was further submitted that the actual amount of the units for a period of 02.07.2020 to 25.08.2020 was Rs.14,355/- and the department of opposite party adjusted Rs.13,855/- in this bill 02.07.2020 to 25.08.2020 remaining amount was Rs.500/- but extra amount for a sum of Rs.95,021/- in the shape of sundry charges was added in the above said impugned bill. After receiving the impugned bill, the complainant immediately approached to the officials of the opposite party regarding the correction in the above said bill and also requested to withdraw the impugned bill, but the officials of the opposite party did not accede the legitimate request of the complainant. 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) delete/cancel the impugned amount of Rs.95021/- from the impugned bill.
b) raise the bill as per actual consumption of meter connection No. 83938977 vide account No. 01941900000 of the complainant or to raise the bill on the basis of average as other bill raised by the opposite party.
c) pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
d) pay Rs. 20,000 /-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 answering opposite party had changed the electricity meter installed in the name of complainant Manohar Masih vide account No. JJ12-223/01941900000 at the premises of the complainant on 18.02.2019 vide Sr. No. 245 and the said meter was installed after removing the old meter vide lab memo NO. 59-10-1-2020 in the presence of the consumer. Thereafter the said old meter was sent to M&T lab vide LL-1 No.23/2261 dated 18.02.2019 for the verification of physical healthiness and accuracy and possible recovery of reading.. After verification, as per lab report bearing memo NO. 59 dated 1001.2020 it was found that:-
(b) Both M & T lead seals found OK;
b) accuracy of meter found dead stop;
c) meter opened in presence of SDO (OP) and in absence of consumer and found internal circuit in order. Action be taken as per Nigam’s rule:
Hence it was clear that accuracy of meter found dead stop and there was a difference in actual readings. As per MCO on dated 18.02.2019 on LL-1 No. 23/2261 & lab report No. 59/M&T dated 10.01.2020 FR-5740 working dead stop. Now account over hauling on old base as per record, total units was to be charged 17054 for an amount of Rs.1,04,026/- and units already charged 1848 for an amount of Rs.9005/- and accordingly difference/chargeable amount was Rs.95,021/- as per readings used by the consumer. The department had issued bill of a period of 02.07.2020 to 25.08.2020 which includes the above said outstanding amount of Rs.95,021/- on account of difference of units a sper actual readings and the last date for the payment of said bill was on 04.09.2020. But instead of making the payment of the total outstanding amount as per actual readings raised by the department, the complainant filed the present false and frivolous complaint with a view to avoid his legal liability on one pretext or the other. The Hon’ble Forum vide its order dated 08.09.2020 directed the complainant to deposit 33% of the impugned amount of Rs.95,521/- within one week form 08.09.2020 and after receiving the above said amount from the complainant, opposite party is directed not to disconnect the electricity supply of the complainant bearing meter connection No. 83938977, account No. 01941900000. 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.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party–DHBVNL with the prayer to: a) delete/cancel the impugned amount of Rs.95021/- from the impugned bill. b) raise the bill as per actual consumption of meter connection No. 83938977 vide account No. 01941900000 of the complainant or to raise the bill on the basis of average as other bill raised by the opposite party.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence,Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Ashish Masih Advocate son of Shri Manohar Masih,, Ex.C-1 – original Special power of attorney, Ex.C-2 – bill message through DHBVNL, Ex.C-3 – bill dated 20.03.2020 for the period 28.05.2019 to 11.03.2020,, Ex.C-4 – bill dated 02.06.2020 for the period 11.3.2020 to 12.06.2020, Ex.C-5 – bill dated 10.07.2020 for the period 12.05.2020 to 30.06.2020, Ex.C-6 bill dated 04.09.2020 for the period 02.07.2020 to 25.08.2020.
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 SDO (OP) Sub Division, DHBVNL, Sub Division No. F-24, Jawahar Colony, Circle – Division, NIT, Faridabad, Ex.R-1 –meter change order,, Ex.R-2 – checking report, Ex.R-3(colly) – Memo No. 59 dated 10.01.2020.
6. After going through the evidence led by the parties, the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is disposed off with the direction to opposite party 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. There are no order as to costs.. 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: 02.05.2023 (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.
