DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.239 OF 2014.
DATE OF INSTITUTION: 20.08.2014.
DATE OF ORDER: 04.09.2017
Sukhbir Singh son of Sh. Rai Singh, resident of Phoolpura Post Office Bambla, Tehsil & District Bhiwani.
………Complainant.
Versus
- M.D. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., Vidyut Nagar, Hisar.
- Secretary, Forum for Redressal Consumer Grievances, D.H.B.V.N.L.- Vidyut Sadan Vidyut Nagar, Hisar.
- XEN operation division DHBVNL, Bhiwani.
- S.D.O. DHBVNL, Sub Urban No. 2, Tosham Road, Bhiwani.
………Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,
BEFORE: Shri Rajesh Jindal, President,
Mr. Parmod Kumar, Member,
Mrs. Sudesh, Member
Present: Sh. B.S. Saroha, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Manoj Kumar, Advocate for OPs.
ORDER:-
RAJESH JINDAL, President:
In brief, the case of the complainant is that he is a bonafide consumer of the Nigam against A/c No. FPID-0187 and no outstanding bill was pending against the complainant. It is alleged that now all of a sudden a new bill having A/c No. FPID-0368 was issued in the name of complainant without any requirement from the complainant. It is alleged that the grievance of issuing of double bill in the name of the complainant was intimated to the Ops but no reply was given to the complainant. The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the respondents, he had to suffer mental agony, harassment and loss. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and as such he had to file the present complaint.
2. Opposite parties on appearance filed written statement alleging therein that the Electric connection bearing A/c No. FP1D-0368 was installed by the DHBVNL under Rajiv Ghandhi Gramin Vidyut Yogna Scheme for BPL families as per the instructions but late on same was disconnected after declaring this connection PDCO vide PDCO No. 61/592 dated 03.05.2014. It is submitted that the bills generated in relates to the A/c No. FP1D-0368 was also withdrawn and there is no recovery of bill amount from the complainant. Hence, in view of the circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops and the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed against respondents with costs.
3. In order to make out his case, the counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-3 along with supporting affidavit.
4. In reply thereto, the counsel for Ops has tendered into evidence documents Annexure A & Annexure B.
5. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsel for the opposite parties.
6. Learned Counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that the complainant is consumer of the OP bearing account no. FPID-0187 and no bills outstanding against the said account of the complainant. The complainant received a new bill having account no. FPID-368 in the name of the complainant. The complainant made representation to the OPs to rectify the mistake.
7. Learned Counsel for the Ops reiterated the contents of the reply. He submitted that the connection bearing account no. FP1D-368 was installed by the OP under the scheme for BPL families and later on the same was disconnected vide PDCO no. 61/592 dated 3.5.2014. The bill generated in this bill account was withdrawn by the OPs and now there is no grievances to the complainant against the OPs.
8. In the light of the pleadings and arguments of the parties, we have examined the relevant material on record. The complainant has prayed for the withdrawal of the bill issued in the account no. FPID-0187 in the name of complainant and as per the contention of the OP the said connection has been disconnected and the bill has been withdrawn and there is no grievance of the complainant against the OP. The counsel for OP contended that the connection was disconnected by his PDCO dated 3.5.2014. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant on 20.8.2014 after the disconnection. In these circumstances, the complainant has no cause of action as on the date of filing of the complaint because the bill has been withdrawn. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the complaint of the complainant is disposed of being fully satisfied. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 04.09.2017. (Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Parmod Kumar) (Sudesh)
Member. Member
