BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FATEHABAD.
Complaint No.:33 of 2016.
Date of Instt.: 20.01.2016.
Date of Decision: 10.04.2017.
Patel Singh son of Shri Mohabbat Ram resident of village Badopal Tehsil & District Fatehabad.
…Complainant.
Versus
1.Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, through Executive Engineer, Operation Division Sub Division DHBVN, Fatehabad District Fatehabad.
2.Sub Divisional Officer, Sub-Division Fatehabad.
3. J.C. Ist Sub Office DHBVN Badopal Tehsil & District Fatehabad.
…Opposite Parties.
Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
BEFORE: Shri.Raghbir Singh, President. Smt.Ansuya Bishnoi, Member. Sh.R.S.Panghal, Member.
Present: Sh. Pankaj Bansal, counsel for the complainant.
Sh. R.D.Gijroiya, counsel for the opposite parties.
ORDER:
Briefly stated the facts of the present complaint are that complainant is having electricity connection bearing account No.BP 1 D 2305-A which was released by the OPs on 05.12.2014. The sanctioned load on the said electricity connection is 0.5 KW and the electricity is being used by the complainant from tube-well line Salamhera feeder. The OPs were releasing the electricity through tube-well line of Salamkhera Feeder for 8 hours in a day and since the day of installation the complainant has been making the payment of consumption charges as per bills regularly and between the bills the OPs have shown the actual electricity consumption 70 to 80 units. However, the OPs have issued a bill bearing No.01123 for the month of May-June 2015 to the complainant wherein they have shown the consumed units as 3665 (157 old units and 3513 new units). Therefore, the consumption of electricity units for the period of two months i.e. 17.03.2015 to 17.05.2015 have been shown as 3513 units. Thereafter, the complainant through an application dated 26.06.2015 intimated the Ops about the defective meter and requested to check and replace the same. On 13.07.2015, officials of the Nigam without getting the spot inspection and checking of meter made a false and fabricated report whereby the status of the meter was shown OK and the M&T seals were also shown as intact. It has been further averred that the OPs did not install the sub meter and they have also started extending threats to the complainant to immediately effect the recovery of the said amount from him and to disconnect the electricity connection of the complainant in case of nonpayment of the above said amount. Now the OPs have issued a bill bearing No.0111 to the tune of Rs.39056/- and also threatened the complainant to pay the same within a day otherwise the electricity connection would be disconnected. The OPs have been repeatedly requested to rectify the impugned bills but to no avail. There is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and thus, he is entitled to compensation of Rs.50,000/- from the OPs on account of mental agony and harassment. Hence, this complaint. In evidence, the complainant has tendered his affidavit as Ex.C1, Ex.C1 (copy of order dated 23.12.2015) and documents Annexure C2 and Annexure C10.
2. Upon notice, OPs appeared and contested the complaint by filing joint reply taking preliminary objections regarding maintainability, cause of action, locus standi and suppression of material facts. It has been further submitted that prior to 05.12.2014 electricity bill was issued to the complainant on average basis and after that electricity meter was installed in which the old reading was 2 and new reading was 80 units. The electricity bill for the period 17.03.2015 to 17.05.2015 was issued as per actual consumption (3513 units) and the complainant was bound to make the payment of the electricity charges. It has been further submitted that the meter of the complainant was found OK and there was no defect in the same as it was giving correct and actual consumption of units. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The other pleas of the complainant have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. In evidence, the Ops have tendered affidavit of Sh.Balbir Singh, JE as Ex.RW1/A and documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R6 and Annexure R1.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully. The counsel for the complainant in his arguments has reiterated the submissions made in the complaint and prayed for acceptance of the complaint. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs has reiterated the submissions made in the reply and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
5. Undisputedly, the complainant is consumer of the OPs and has been using the electricity through Salamkhera Feeder. Vide the present complaint the complainant has challenged the electricity bill No.01123 issued to him for consumption of the electricity for the period from 17.03.2015 to 17.05.2015. Vide the said bill a consumption of 3513 electricity units have been shown for a period of only two months and the same is excessive and on account of defective/faulty meter. A perusal of the record reveals that sanctioned load of the electricity meter of the complainant is 0.50 KW. It is also not disputed that the supply f electricity to the complainant is through tube well line and as per Annexure C5, it is also evident that during this period electricity was supplied to the complainant only 8 hours in a day. A perusal of the consumption pattern reveals that in February-2015 and April-15 only 78 and 72 units respectively have been shown consumed. In August-2015 and December-2015 81 and 408 units respectively have been shown consumed. In view of the above mentioned facts, it is transpired that consumption of 3513 units shown in the bill for the period from 17.03.2015 to 17.05.2015 is excessive and possibility of defect or jumping of meter cannot be ruled out. Moreover the complainant vide application dated 26.06.2015 (Annexure C-6) had requested to the OPs to check the meter and changing of the same. Perusal of this application reveals that it was marked to Sh.Satbir Singh JE with remarks to check and report. It is strange that the compliance/action on this application was taken in very casual manner because in the report made on the back of this document reveals that the working of the meter has been shown as OK and the seals (M&T) were intact but whole report does not depict that how the official concerned had evaluated the status of the meter because there is nothing on the case file to show that said official was expertise in evaluating the status of the electricity meter without getting the same checked from concerned laboratory, therefore, this report in no way, can be taken as a authentic document. The procedure adopted by the official of the Nigam appears to be made in hurry without takingcare the interest of the consumer. Another surprising factor which this Forum has noted that the application was moved on 26.06.2015 but it is not clear that on which date concerned official had checked the meter because there is cutting on the date on the bottom of the signature.
6. During course of arguments it was also brought to the notice of this Forum by learned counsel for the Ops that the meter was got checked from M&T Lab (Ex.R2) where the status of the meter had been shown as OK. Learned counsel for the complainant has stressed this report on the ground that this document is not helpful to the case of the OPs because the testing of the meter, if any, was not done either in his presence or in the presence of his representative and the said report was made without following the proper procedure. The Ops have failed to prove on file that when they had already declared the status of the meter OK then what was the necessity to get the meter tested again after a week on 20.07.2015 from the first report (Ex.R6) and that too was not tested as per the policy of the Nigam. Therefore, this report is also not helpful to the case of OPs because it appears that it had made just to cover up the previous report and to show that the OPs have acted fairly in accordance with the rules of the Nigam.
8. For the reasons and findings recorded above, we dispose of the present complaint by declaring the impugned electricity bill qua unit 3513 as shown in Annexure C9 to be illegal and null & void and the Ops are restrained from effecting any recovery on the basis of 3513 units of the said impugned bill. The OPs are however, entitled to recover the amount from the complainant after overhauling the account of the complainant taking into consideration the 6 months average consumption recorded by the new installed meter for the period during which the Ops sent the electricity bills to the complainant. The OPs are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony, harassment and cost of litigation etc. The compliance of this order be made within a period of one month. However, the Ops are at liberty to charge bill for the consumed units as shown in bill Annexure C9 except 3513 units. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum. Dated:10.04.2017
(
Raghbir Singh)
President (Ansuya Bisnoi)
Distt.Consumer Disputes Member
Redressal Forum, Fatehabad.
