Haryana

Jind

CC/130/2014

Shyam Lal - Complainant(s)

Versus

DHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Vinod Nasal

22 Jul 2016

ORDER

BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JIND. 
                                           Complaint No. 130 of 2014
   Date of Institution: 14.10.2014
   Date of final order: 22.7.2016

Shyam Lal son of Sh. Chandan, resident of Arya Up Nagar, Narwana, Tehsil Narwana, District Jind. 

                                                             ….Complainant.
                                       Versus
Sub Divisional Officer Operation (J-31), DHBVNL Narwana, Tehsil Narwana District Jind  
                                                      …...Opposite party.
                          Complaint under section 12 of
              Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Before: Sh. Dina Nath Arora, President.
            Smt. Bimla Sheokand, Member.
            Sh. Mahinder Kumar Khurana, Member.    

Present:  Sh. Vinod Bansal Adv. for complainant.
          Sh. M.L Mittal Adv. for opposite party.
         
ORDER:

             The grievance of the complainant is that he is consumer of having electric connection bearing No. J31MA210931A. The opposite party had issued a bill dated 22.9.2014 amounting to Rs. 74938/- of 7310 units whereas the complainant had deposited all  the previous bills in time and no amount is outstanding against him. On enquiry the opposite party told the complainant that from 10/2010 to 6/2014, they 

               Shyam La v/s DHBVNL
                          …..2……
will  issue the bill to complainant on average basis not on  actual reading.
2.    On the other hand the version  of the opposite party that from October 2010 to June 2014  the reading of the complainant could not be recorded and thereafter  upto June 2014 the opposite party had issued his average bill to the  complainant. The opposite party contented that the bill is correct one and issued on the actual consumption basis.
3.    During the course of arguments the counsel for complainant had admitted that the bill in question was of actual consumption reading and he is not liable to pay the surcharge/interest because the opposite party had on fault had not to issue the bill on actual reading. The counsel for opposite party has argued that the bill issued by the            opposite party is correct one and complainant is liable to pay the same.
4.    The counsel for the complainant has made a  statement that the opposite party has not issued the bill from 28.10.2010 to 28.8.2014 on reading basis. The opposite party had issued the bill on average/fixed units  during the period 28.10.2010 to 28.8.2014. However the complainant is ready to deposit the amount shown in the disputed  bill Ex. C-15 without surcharge/interest in six equal installments  alongwith future bill after deducting the  amount which the   complainant had already deposited with opposite party on average / fixed  basis.
5.    Heard . After hearing the counsel for the parties as well as going through the           the record we are of the considered  opinion  that the opposite party is  deficient in 
            Shyam La v/s DHBVNL
                          …..3……
service not to issue the  monthly bill on reading  basis.  They have  issued for actual reading bill from the  period    28.10.2010 to 28.8.2014 in  bill dated  22.9.2014 which is illegal. However the complainant is ready to deposit the bill of actual reading without surcharge in six equal installments.
6.    In view of the discussion above the complaint is partly allowed and the complainant is directed to deposit the amount shown in bill dated 22.9.2014 in six equal bimonthly installments.  The opposite party is  also directed  to reissue  the bill from the  period 28.9.2010 to 28.9.2014 without surcharge/ interest  after  deducting  the amount which     was already paid  by  the complainant  on average/  fixed basis .  The  opposite party is further directed to  accept the said amount             in six equal bimonthly installments without surcharge/interest. The complaint is decided accordingly. Copy of order be supplied to the parties under the rule. File be consigned to record room after due compliance. 
Announced on:   22.7.2016
                                              President,
       Member       Member                 District Consumer Disputes                                          Redressal Forum, Jind

 

 

 

 

 

 

                Shyam Lal v/s DHBVNL        
                        
                   
Present:  Sh. Vinod Bansal Adv. for complainant.
          Sh. M.L Mittal Adv. for opposite party.
              

               Arguments heard. To come up on 22.7.2016 for orders. 
                                      President,
        Member              Member         DCDRF, Jind
                                  22.7.2016             
        

Present:  Sh. Vinod Bansal Adv. for complainant.
          Sh. M.L Mittal Adv. for opposite party.
                                

           Order announced. Vide our separate order of even date, the complaint is partly allowed. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.  
                                       President,
        Member              Member         DCDRF, Jind
                                  22.7.2016