BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FATEHABAD.

                                                           Complaint No.:181 of 2016.

                                                           Date of Instt.: 19.07.2016.

                                                           Date of Decision: 07.06.2017.

Savitri Devi widow of Bhim Singh resident of Maturam Colony, Gali No.2, Tehsil & District Fatehabad.

                                                                             …Complainant.

                             Versus

1.Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, through Executive Engineer, Operation Division DHBVN, Fatehabad  Tehsil & District Fatehabad.

2.S.D.O.Operation City, D.H.B.V.N Fatehabad District Fatehabad.   

                                                                             …Opposite Parties.

             Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

BEFORE:             Shri.Raghbir Singh, President.                                                                              Sh.R.S.Panghal, Member.                                                                           Smt.Ansuya Bishnoi, Member.

Present:                Sh. Naresh Sharma, counsel for the complainant.

                             Sh. Dushyant Gera, counsel for the OPs.

ORDER:

                             Briefly stated the facts of the present complaint are that complainant is having domestic electricity connection bearing account No. No.SC-1D-609 in her name and she has been making the payment of all the electricity bills regularly and the sanctioned load was 0.40 KW. The opposite parties have issued a bill to the complainant for a sum of Rs.30224/- payable on 11.07.2016 which is wrong, against law and facts, without providing any detail and opportunity of being heard, against the principles of natural justice, arbitrary, null and void and is liable to be set aside because the meter was not in working condition for the last many months and regarding this the complainant has intimated to the OPs many a times. It has been further averred that on the application of the complainant the OPs had changed the meter in February/March, 2016. The opposite parties have been repeatedly requested to treat the impugned bill as null and void but in vain as the ops have not only flatly refused to do so rather they have also started extending threats to the complainant to immediately effect the recovery of the said amount from the complainant and to disconnect the electricity connection of the complainant in case of non payment of the above said amount. There is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and thus, she is entitled to compensation of Rs.10,000/- from the opposite parties on account of mental agony and harassment. Hence, this complaint. In evidence, the complainant has tendered her affidavit as Ex.C-1 C1 and documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C4.

2.                          Upon notice, opposite parties 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 many a times the house of the complainant was locked and she did not make the payment of the bills for the period from 17.10.2015 to 19.04.2016, therefore, bill amounting to Rs.26,367/- payable on 10.05.2016 was issued to her and in the said bill current consumption bill was for Rs.8109/- and the arrears were Rs.21,838/- less adjustment was Rs.4797/- and the surcharge was Rs.773/-, therefore, total bill was for Rs.27140/- and on 03.09.2014 a sum of Rs.12,378/- were due against her. It has been further submitted that on 05.05.2016 the meter of the complainant was changed and Rs.2,118/- were shown as current charges and an amount of Rs.27139/- were shown as arrears.  The OPs have issued bill to the tune of Rs.29,362/- payable on 1.07.2016 wherein amount of Rs.862/- has been shown as surcharge as per rules and the Ops are entitled to recover the same from the complainant. The bill issued to the complainant was for actual consumption and the Ops are legally entitled to recover the same from him. 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.Gulshan Wadhwa, Sub Divisional Officer as Annexure R1 and documents Annexure R2 to Annexure R11.

4.                          We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the evidence and documents on the file carefully.

5.                          After hearing both the counsels and going through the material available on the case file, this Forum is of the considered opinion that present complaint is baseless and having no merit. The complainant has challenged the impugned bill payable on 11.07.2016 for an amount of Rs.29362/- on the ground that said bill has been issued by the opposite parties for having consumed 112 & 230 units which is arbitrary, without providing any detail, null and void and is liable to be set aside. According to the complainant she was making the payment of all the electricity bills regularly.

6.                          The point for determination before this Forum is that as to whether the opposite parties have rightly issued the bill payable on 11.07.2016 for an amount of Rs.29362/- to the complainant or not? A perusal of the impugned bill reveals that in the previous bills status of the meter has been shown as OK and even in this bill also the status of the meter has been shown as OK and complainant did not dispute about the correctness of the meter. The bill in dispute has been issued on the basis of actual consumption and not on average basis.  Though the complainant had moved an application before the OPs for correcting the bill but this fact also shows that the complainant had not approached to this Forum with clean hands because the OPs have specifically mentioned in the reply that the premises of the complainant were checked and many a times the same was found locked and thereafter the bill was sent for actual consumption. The opposite parties have taken a stand that the bill in dispute issued to the complainant was for the units consumed by her. However, instead of depositing the electricity bill with the Nigam the complainant has approached to this Forum without any reason by twisting the facts. It is strange that on one hand the complainant is trying to show that the bill in question is illegal and has not been issued as per actual consumption and on the other hand she has not paid the electricity charges which were calculated by the Nigam after checking the premises of the complainant. The act and conduct of the complainant clearly shows that he has not approached this Forum with bonafide intention and in this way or that way he has concealed material facts from this Forum.

7.                            In view of the aforementioned discussion we are of the considered opinion that the complaint deserves dismissal. It is ordered accordingly. There is no order as to costs.  Since the complainant has already deposited 40 % of the disputed amount i.e. Rs.30224/- therefore, she is directed to pay remaining 60 % of the disputed amount i.e. Rs.30224/- with Nigam within one month. The interim order dated 26.07.2016 passed by this Forum stands vacated.  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:07.06.2017

  (Raghbir Singh)          

President                                                 (Ansuya Bisnoi)                                                   (R.S.Panghal)  

District Consumer Disputes                          Member                                                               Member               

  Redressal Forum, Fatehabad.