O R D E R
(By Smt. H.V.Ramana,Member on behalf of the Bench)
This complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was filed by the complainant against the opposite parties to pay compensation of Rs. 16,000/- to the complainant towards the excess Electricity charges collected from the complainant, including the charges incurred and the loss suffered by him for mental agony physical pain and costs of this complaint.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are as follows:-The complainant residing at D.No.68.9.48/3, Vidyuth Naagar, Kakinada and he was having Electrical Consumer connection bearing service No.6258. As the current load is not sufficient to the needs he applied for III phase supply and paid Rs.3,900/- by way of two demand drafts in the name of Divisional Electrical Engineer, Kakinada and submitted them to the Manager Customer Service Centre, APEPDCL, Kakinada on 07.04.2010. The opposite parties installed III phase connection and the same was working promptly upto 27.05.12. All of a sudden, due to power fluctuation the said meter was burned, and a complaint was lodged by the complainant with the service centre on 27.05.12. The Assistant Engineer and lineman of the area visited premises on 28.05.12 and advised the complainant to pay Rs.1800/- towards cost of Electrical meter. Therefore the complainant paid the above said amount in the Customer Care Centre. The Assistant Engineer installed a new meter on 30.05.12. After installation of the meter a bill for the month of 20.5.12 to 20.6.12 was billed for 251 units, for Rs.968/-. Again in the month of July, 2012, the opposite party people prepared a bill for Rs.2696/- and stated that the meter was struck, therefore an average bill was made for that period. The complainant immediately approached the opposite parties at Pratap Nagar, D6 office and also informed the same to the Assistant Engineer to rectify the defect. But there was no action taken by the opposite parties.
The complainant also submitted due to fluctuations in Electricity supply the meter was burnt and the same was installed by the opposite parties because of installation of new meter by the opposite party, the complainant incurred an additional expenditure of Rs.1800/-.He also submitted that the new meter was struck and the employees of opposite party prepared the bill on the basis of average.
The average consumption of previous three months i.e., March, April, and May are the seasonal months and the consumption will be more compared to other months. The opposite parties have to keep this in mind while preparing the bill. But the same was not followed by them. Therefore the complainant has to pay huge amount of bill which is not correct. The complainant made another complaint to the opposite parties when he is received the second bill on 26.6.96. But they have not taken any action, this amounts deficiency in service on part of opposite parties. Hence, the complaint.
3. Written version filed by the 2ndopposite party and the same was adopted by the 1st opposite party. The opposite parties denied the allegations made by the complainant and submitted that burning of III phase meter is due to fluctuations is not correct. If really there is a fluctuation of power the meters in the same street would have been burned. They also submitted when the Assistant Engineer and their lineman visited the premises they found that the wiring in the premises of complainant was defective and also asked to get the same to be rectified. The opposite parties further submitted that the bill was made correctly and there is no grounds to grant any relief and the complainant is not entitled Rs.10,000/- towards damages. Hence the complaint may be dismissed.
4. In order to prove the case of the complainant, his affidavit has been filed and Exs. A1 to A14 have been got marked. The 2nd opposite party filed proof affidavit.
5. Heard both sides.
6. The points for determination are:-
1) Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled any compensation as prayed for?
3) To what relief?
7 Point No.1& 2: The complainant submitted that he applied for III phase meter and the same was installed by the opposite parties vide Ex.A1. Later due to fluctuations the III phase meter was burned and the same was informed to the opposite parties after payment of charges vide Ex.A2. The complainant further submitted that he received a bill after installation of new meter for Rs.968/- vide Ex.A3 and the same was paid vide Ex.A4. The opposite parties employee came and billed the electrical consumption from 20.6.2012 to 20.7.2012 for Rs.2696/- and also informed him that the meter was struck therefore an average billing was made for that period and the same was informed by the opposite parties. The complainant made a complaint to the opposite parties vide Ex.A5, but no action was taken by them. Again after one month i.e., 20.7.12 to 18.8.2012 another bill was issued for Rs.2696/- vide Ex.A6 and paid by the complainant vide Ex.A7. The complainant also lodged another complaint before the opposite parties vide Ex.A8. The complainant also received another bill for the months August and September for Rs.2696/- and the same was paid vide Ex.A10. The complainant also filed other bills for the months October, November, December and January vide Ex.A11 to A14. The main contention of the complainant is because of fluctuations his new meter got burnt and the same was replaced by the opposite party by paying Rs.1800/- by the complainant. He also contended that the said meter was struck after one month of their installation and their employee assessed the meter reading by averaging previous three months reading and prepared the bill without rectifying the fault in the meter. Because of above the incidents the complainant has to meet an additional expenditure and suffering from time to time.
The opposite party contended that the complainant is put to strict proof of each and every allegation in the complaint. They further contended that the three phase meter was burnt not due to fluctuations, if really there is fluctuation of the meters in the street would have been burned. When they visited the house of complainant they advised him that his wiring was defective and asked him to rectify the same. There is no negligence on the part of opposite party for burning of the meter and the complainant has not filed any document before this forum to show that there is fluctuation and as such the meter was burned. With regard to assessment of the consumption of power is based on previous meter reading and everything is done according to the provisions of the Electricity Act 2003.
In view of the above discussion and perusing the documents, the opposite parties submitted that if the meter is struck, they will assess the consumption based on previous meter readings and it is the practice as per the provisions of their Act. But, in this case as per our observation the opposite parties has not attended and rectified the complaint. It is the bounden duty of the opposite parties to rectify the struck meter immediately after receiving the complaints from the complainant vide Ex. A5 and A8. Therefore, this amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and the complainant is entitled for damages for mental agony caused by the opposite parties. It is also just and necessary to replace the meter in place of struck meter with a sealed and new meter by the opposite parties.
8. Point No.3: In the result, the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.2000/-towards damages for mental agony Rs.500/- towards costs and also replace the meter in place of struck meter with a sealed and a new meter. The opposite parties are directed to comply the above directions immediately after receipt of the copy of this order.
Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us, in open Forum, this the 14th day of November, 2014.
Sd/- xxx Sd/- xxxx Sd/- xxxxxx
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
For complainant : None For opposite parties : None
DOCUMENTS MARKED
For complainant:-
Ex.A1 Dt.29.3.2010 :Three phase meter request (Original).
Ex.A2Dt.28.5.2012 :Permanent receipt for Rs.1800/- paid in customer service (Original).
Ex.A3 Dt.20.05.2012 :Demand notice issued for Rs.968/- for the period 20.5.12 to 20.6.12 for Rs.968/- for 251 units (Original).
Ex.A4 Dt.25.06.2012 :Receipt for online payment for Rs.968/-
Ex.A5 Dt.21.07.2012 :Letter filed in the office of the Assistant Engineer, Kakinada (Original).
Ex.A6 Dt.20.06.2012 to 20.7.2012:Demand notice issued by the opposite parties (Original).
Ex.A7 Dt.30.07.2012 :Receipt for online payment Rs.2696/-.
Ex.A8Dt.24.08.2012 :Letter filed in the office of The Assistant Engineer, Kakinada (Original).
Ex.A9Dt.20.07.2012 to 19.8.2012 :Demand notice issued for Rs.2696/- (Original).
Ex.A10Dt.27.08.2012 :Receipt for online payment Rs.2696/- (Original).
Ex.A11Dt.19.8.12 to 20.9.12 :Demand notice issued for Rs.851/- (Original).
Ex.A12Dt.20.9.12 to 20.10.12 :Demand notice issued for Rs.1206/- (Original).
Ex.A13Dt.20.10.12 to 20.11.12 :Demand notice issued for Rs.2025/- (Original).
Ex.A14Dt.20.11.12 to 19.12.12 :Demand notice issued for Rs.1285/- (Original).
For opposite parties:- Nil
Sd/- xxx Sd/- xxxx Sd/- xxxxxx
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
