Haryana

Jind

03/14

Rakesh - Complainant(s)

Versus

DHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Pawan Dhillon

09 Feb 2015

ORDER

BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JIND.

                                           Complaint No. 03 of 2014

   Date of Institution: 10.1.2014

   Date of final order: 9.2.2015

Rakesh s/o Sh. Ram Kumar r/o Naguran, Tehsil and District Jind.      

                                                                    ….Complainant.

                                       Versus

1. Sub Divisional Officer, OP Sub Division, D.H.B.V.N., Naguran.
2. D.H.B.V.N. through Executive Engineer, OP Division Jind, Tehsil and District Jind.

                                                            …..Opposite parties.

                          Complaint under section 12 of

Before: Sh. Hari Singh Khokhar, President.

            Smt. Bimla Sheokand, Member.

 

Present: Sh. Pawan Dhillon, Adv. for complainant.

             Sh. A.S. Saini, Adv. for  Opposite Parties.

            

ORDER:

             The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant  is consumer of the opposite parties having electricity connection No.J14KR113665P for domestic purposes and paying the energy bills regularly and nothing is due against him. The opposite parties have rendered a consumption bill No.2761 dated 25.10.2013 worth Rs.8834/- and the complainant raised objection but the opposite parties told the  complainant to deposit the bill and excess amount will be deducted in next consumption bills. The complainant deposited Rs.8834/- on 11.11.2013.  The opposite parties have rendered next consumption bill No.2766 dated 24.12.2013 worth Rs.21,209/- and showing the consumed 2881 units. Both the above said bills rendered by the opposite parties are illegal and arbitrarily. The average consumption of the complainant is 80 to 100 units in every bill. The bills have been added without notice and without providing the

                        Rakesh Vs. SDO DHBVN etc.

                                   …2…

opportunity of being heard to the complainant by the opposite parties. The complainant requested to the opposite parties many times to correct the bills but the opposite parties have refused to correct the bills. Deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties is alleged.  It is prayed that the complaint be accepted and bill amount of Rs.21,209/- be adjudged illegal, null and void  and the same be set aside and refund a sum of Rs.8382/- of arrear illegally added in the bill No.2761 dated 25.10.2013 and not to disconnect the power supply to the meter of complainant.  It is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of mental pain and agony as well as to pay a sum of Rs.5,500/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.

2.      Upon notice, the opposite parties have put in appearance and filed the written reply stating in the preliminary objections i.e. the complainant has no cause of action and  locus-standi to file the present complaint; the complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands and has suppressed the true and material facts, the complaint is not maintainable in the present forum  and the complaint is false and frivolous. On merits, it is contended that  the consumption bills have been issued as per meter reading which is actual consumption of electricity by the complainant. No excess bill amount has been deposited by the complainant. Both the bills are legal and correct as per consumption charges. The bills have been issued after following all mandatory provisions and are binding upon the complainant. All the other allegations have been denied by the opposite parties. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Dismissal of complaint with cost of Rs.10,000/- is prayed for.

3.       In evidence, the complainant has produced his own affidavit Ex. C-1, copies

 

                             Rakesh Vs. SDO DHBVN etc.

                                   …3…

of  electricity bills Ex. C-2  to C-6  and copy of receipt Ex. C-7 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, the opposite parties  have  produced the  affidavit of  Sh. P.D. Kaushik, SDO Ex. OP-1, sundry charged Ex. OP-2, copy of checking report Ex. OP-3 and CD Ex. OP-4 and closed the evidence.

4.       We have heard the arguments of Ld. Counsel of both the parties and also perused the record placed on file. The complainant is consumer of opposite parties under meter account No. J14KR113665P. The opposite parties issued a consumption bill No.2761 dated 25.10.2013 worth Rs.8,834/- for a period of two months from 29.7.2013 to 29.9.2013 and 14 units shown as consumed. When the complainant raised objection, then the opposite parties told the complainant to deposit the said bill and excess amount will be deducted in next bills. On the assurance of opposite parties, the complainant deposited Rs.8,834/- on dated 11.11.2013 Ex. C-3. The opposite parties again issued a consumption bill No.2766 dated 24.12.2013 worth Rs.21,209/- for a period of two months showing therein consumed units 2881. The complainant approached the opposite parties and asked them to correct the bill but all in vain.

5.       On the other hand, the opposite parties have averred that the consumption bills have been issued as per meter reading which is actual consumption of electricity by the complainant. Both the bills are legal and correct as per consumption charges. No excess bill amount has been deposited by the complainant. The bills have been issued after following all mandatory provisions and are binding upon the complainant.

6.       The complainant cannot consume as shown 2881 units in two months. The average consumption of complainant is 80 to 100 units in every bill and the complainant was depositing every bill. The meter reading was jumped during the period of July to December 2013 and the bills have been added without notice and without providing the opportunity of being heard to the complainant by the opposite parties.

 

                             Rakesh Vs. SDO DHBVN etc.

                                   …4…

7.       For the above said reasons, deficiency in service is established on the part of the opposite parties. Therefore, the complaint of the complainant is accepted. Consequently, the bill issued by opposite parties for Rs.21,209/- for the period from 29.9.2013 to 29.11.2013 is set aside and the opposite parties are directed to issue amended bill on the average basis considering the usage of previous six months. This order be complied within two months after receiving the certified copy of this  order. Parties will bear their own costs.  Copies of order be supplied to the parties under the rule. File be consigned to the record-room.

Announced on: 9.2.2015

                                                                President,

Member                                District Consumer Disputes                                                                  Redressal Forum, Jind