BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 142 of 2017
Date of Institution : 23.06.2017
Date of Decision : 19.1.2018
Mahabir, aged 33 years son of Sh. Mani Ram, resident of village Gigorani, Tehsil and District Sirsa. ……Complainant.
Versus.
- Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., Sub Division, Nathusari Chopta, District Sirsa.
- Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. through Managing Director, Hisar.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI R.L. AHUJA…… PRESIDENT
SHRI MOHINDER PAUL RATHEE……MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Mahesh Pareek, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. K.K. Relan, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
In brief, the case of the complainant is that complainant is a poor person and is a labourer. That there was an electric connection No.T24SN371350 at the house of the complainant in village Gigorani, District Sirsa. It is further averred that complainant had been paying the bills of electricity up to March, 2015 and had paid his last bill of Rs.3000/- on 23.4.2015 vide reference No.4443181 and thereafter he went to Rajasthan for labour work and remained there up to October/ November, 2016, so neither he received the bill of that period nor he could deposit the same. That in the month of December, the complainant received a bill of Rs.7980/- which was for a huge amount as usually they used to receive the bills of Rs.250/-/ 350/- for two months and in this way, the expected bill was of Rs.4000/-. That the complainant made several rounds to the opposite parties for correction of this bill but the amount of the bill was not rectified, so the complainant could not deposit the said bill and thereafter the officials of op no.1 removed the meter and for the last six months the complainant remained at his house without electricity. It is further averred that now in the month of June, 2017, the complainant was handed over a bill of Rs.51,179/- whereas in the month of December, he received bill of Rs.7980/- and thereafter meter of the complainant was removed and now without meter, the bill of about Rs.43,000/- for six months has been prepared which is against law and the above said bill of Rs.51,179/- is liable to be set aside and the opposite parties be directed to install the meter of the complainant and be also directed to pay compensation of Rs.40,000/- for harassment and mental agony. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that from January, 2014 to January, 2015, no bill amount had been deposited by the consumer before the nigam. In the month of March, 2015 bill of Rs.5284/- issued by the nigam to the consumer and out of that amount only Rs.3000/- got deposited by the consumer. It is further submitted that after deposit of Rs.3000/- as part payment before the nigam on 23.4.2015, no further bill amount from the period of May, 2015 to January 2017 had been deposited by the complainant before the Nigam. So the electricity connection of the consumer was disconnected by the nigam being defaulting amount vide PDCO No.86/9 dated 17.1.2017. At that time the reading in the meter was 7368 which was clearly mentioned in PDCO. Hence as per this reading, a bill of Rs.51,179/- was issued to the consumer. The bill issued to the consumer as per the reading in the meter at the time of PDCO and as per units consumed by him. The complainant is legally liable to make the payment of this amount before the nigam and the nigam is legally entitled to recover this amount from the complainant as per law and rules of the nigam. It is submitted that as per the complete detail of the electricity connection number SN37/1350, the consumer is not making the payment of the electricity bills regularly and he is a habitual defaulter. As per the record/ ledger account of the nigam, the amount of Rs.52692/- is still due against the consumer till July, 2017. With these averments, dismissal of complaint has been prayed for.
3. The parties then led their respective evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.
5. The perusal of the record reveals that complainant in order to prove his case has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1/A wherein he has reiterated all the averments of his complaint. He has also placed on record copy of receipt of amount of Rs.3000/- as Ex.C1 and copies of bills Ex.C2, Ex.C3. On the other hand, opposite parties have furnished affidavit of Sh. Ravi, Sub Divisional Officer as Ex.R1 in which he has reiterated the averments of the written statement and ops have produced copy of ledger Ex.R2 and copy of reconnection order Ex.R3.
6. Though the complainant has taken a specific plea in his complaint that he is holding domestic electric connection and he used to pay the electricity bills regularly and lastly he paid an amount of Rs.3000/- in the year 2015. He has further averred in the complaint that he received bill of Rs.7980/- in the year 2016 though he was expecting bill of Rs.4000/- and now ops have sent bill of Rs.51,179/-. The evidence of the complainant reveals that complainant has not moved any application to the ops and he has simply prayed for change of the meter. He has placed on record only receipt and copies of bills as Ex.C1 to Ex.C3. Nor he has moved application for sending his meter in the ME Laboratory in order to ascertain correct reading. On the other hand, during the course of arguments, learned counsel for ops has produced reconnection order and has contended that connection of the complainant was reconnected vide order dated 28.1.2017. He has further contended that complainant is a regular defaulter in depositing electricity charges and he is avoiding to make payment of due amount in the garb of present complaint. The main grudge of the complainant is qua the excessive bill though he has not sought any relief for the replacement of the meter or to send the meter in the ME laboratory but however in the interest of justice and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it will be in the fitness of things if present complaint is partly allowed and opposite parties are directed to overhaul the account of the complainant in the presence of complainant after giving a seven days prior notice.
7. In view of the above, we partly allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to overhaul the account of the complainant in the presence of complainant after giving a seven days prior notice to the complainant. The opposite parties are liable to comply with this order within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:19.1.2018. Member District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
