DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NARNAUL

                                      CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.200 of 2012

                                      DATE OF INSTITUTION:- 04.10.2012

                                      DATE OF ORDER:-25.03.2015                            

Satyavir Singh son of Shri Rati Pal son of Shri Jaswant, Resident of village Kheri, Sub Tehsil Kanina, Tehsil & District Mahendergarh

……………COMPLAINANT

                   VERSUS

1. Dakshini Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam through Managing Director, Dakshini Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Vidhyut Nagar, Hisar
2. Executive Engineer/ D.G.M., Operation Division, Dakshini Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Mahendergarh
3. S.D.O./ A.G.M., Operation Sub Division, Dakshini Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Kanina

………….. OPPOSITE PARTIES

COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT

BEFORE :- Rajesh Jindal, President

                   Smt. Usha Yadav, Member

                   L.K. Nandwani, Member

Present:-  Shri Parvinder Singh, Advocate for the complainant.

                Shri N. N. Yadav, Advocate for the opposite parties

ORDER:-

Rajesh Jindal, President:

                   According to the complaint, brief facts are that the complainant’s father Rati Pal son of Shri Jaswant obtained a domestic electricity connection bearing A/C No.CC1D-0186 from the office of opposite party No.3 and his father Rati Pal had died.  The complainant has alleged that after the death of his father he paid the electricity bills upto April 2008 with the opposite parties.  The complainant has averred that the electricity meter installed at his premises is working properly, but the opposite parties have started issuing bills on average basis instead of actual consumption shown by the electricity meter.  The complainant moved applications dated 19.03.2007, 03.06.2008 and 27.05.2011 with the opposite parties for rectification of bills issued on average basis, but to no effect.  The complainant has not paid the electricity bills after April 2008.  The opposite parties have wrongly, illegally and against actual consumption issued bill for the period from 23.10.2011 to 17.02.2012 for an amount of Rs.23,330/- by showing 4086 old units, 4901 new units and 815 consumed units.  Thereafter, the opposite parties have issued bill No.00218 dated 17.08.2012 for an amount of Rs.51,155/- by showing 801 old units, 5016 new units and 4215 consumed units to the complainant, which is wrong, illegal and null and void.  The complainant requested the opposite parties several times to rectify the bills, issued on average basis, as per actual consumption shown by the electricity meter, but to no effect.  The complainant has prayed that the opposite parties be directed to rectify the impugned electricity bills, issued on average basis, as per actual consumption shown by the electricity meter and also prayed to declare bill No.00218 dated 17.08.2012 as null and void.  The complainant has also claimed compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for mental agony and harassment.

2.                The opposite parties filed their joint reply stating, inter-alia, therein that the complainant has not got changed the above said electricity connection in his name and as such he is not the consumer of the opposite parties.  The opposite parties have averred that the account of the complainant was over-hauled and an amount of Rs.46,674/- was adjusted in the account of the electricity connection in dispute.  After the adjustment of said amount, the complainant had paid the amount of bill on 10.05.2013 with the opposite parties.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed with costs.

3.                In order to make out his case, the complainant has placed on record his own supporting affidavits Annexures C-1 & C-2, copies of applications Annexures C-3 to C-5, copies of postal receipts Annexure C-5, copies of applications Annexures C-6 & C-7 and copies of electricity bills Annexures C-8 to C-13. 

4.                In reply thereto, the opposite parties have placed on record copy of ledger Annexure R-1 and copy of Sundry Charges and Allowance Register Annexure R-2.

5.                We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

6.                 Admittedly, the relief claimed by the complainant in his complaint has been granted by the opposite parties.  Learned counsel for the complainant stated that the complainant should be awarded compensation for mental agony, harassment and litigation cost.

7.                 Learned counsel for the opposite parties opposed the request of learned counsel for the complainant.

8.                The officials of the opposite parties are supposed to take care the interest of the consumers according to the rules and regulations of the Nigam and to make efforts to avoid unnecessary litigation.  Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it proper that the opposite parties should be burdened with some cost for not taking timely and proper steps for redressal of grievances of the complainant despite his repeated requests and representations.  Thus, in these circumstances, we award a compensation of Rs.2500/- to the complainant against the opposite parties.  The opposite parties are directed to adjust the said amount of compensation in future bills of the complainant.  With these observations, the complaint of the complainant is disposed of.

Announced:-

25.03.2015           

(Smt. Usha Yadav)          (L. K. Nandwani)            (Rajesh Jindal)

Member                          Member                          President,

                                                                      District Consumer Disputes

                                                                      Redressal Forum, Narnaul