SMT. RAVI SUSHA: PRESIDENT
Complainant filed this complaint U/S 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 against Opposite Parties seeking to get an order directing Opposite Parties to pay Rs.25,000/- as monetary loss caused due to the damage happened to the home appliances, to cancel the excess bill issued by OPs on 25/01/2018 along with Rs.10000 towards compensation for mental and physical agony caused to the complainant, alleging deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Parties
Brief facts in the complaint are that complainant and his family is the permanent resident in the building stated in the complaint and for the residential building 3 face electric connection had obtained having consumer number 1166795003292. From the date of connection complainant and his family was using the electricity and paid the bimonthly bills issued by 2nd OP. It is stated by complainant that on September 2017, the officials of OPs replaced his electric meter with a new one and from the date of fixing new electric meter his electricity bill was enhanced from Rs.2000 to Rs. 7000. Hence he had given a complaint on 23/12/2017 to 2nd OP by remitting fee to check the new electric meter. On 08/01/2018, the employers of OP came to his house and fixed test meter. It is alleged by complainant that at the time of fixing the test meter, the home appliance equipments in his house ie electric oven, washing machine were damaged and wires in connection with meter board were got burned. Complainant alleged that the incident was happened due to the negligent work done by the private employees of OP. On 09/01/2018 itself complainant had given complaint 2nd OP but there was no positive result obtained instead of that on 25/01/2018 2nd OP issued a notice to complainant stating that from 21/09/2016 to 26/08/2017 complainant had used excess consumption of electricity and directed to pay Rs.34522 by issuing a short assessment bill. According to complainant he is not liable to pay the amount assessed in the said bill dated 25/01/2018 and stated that the site mahazer and survey report prepared by OP in connection with the disputed bill were falsely made by them. The said actions of OPs were caused monetary loss and mental agony to the complainant and his family. Hence filed this complaint.
OPs appeared and resisted the complaint. It is submitted by OP that as per the service connection agreement between complainant and 2nd OP, the connected load of complainant was 7790 watts. It is submitted that consumption shown in the meter shown fitted during 07/06/2016 to 26/08/2017 as ‘0’ and hence they issued the bill for average consumption of electricity. But as per IPDS Scheme of central Government, the existing meter was changed with a new electric meter. After receiving complaint from the complainant dated 23/12/2017, OP2 has conducted an inspection on the premises of complainant and fitted a test meter in parallel to the electric meter on 08/01/2018. OPs denied the allegation raised by complainant about the alleged incident happened on the house of him. It is pleaded by OP that on 09/01/2018 complainant submitted a complaint in OP2 alleging the damage of electric oven, washing machine etc. and caused monetary loss of Rs.25000. On that day itself OP2 made site inspection and prepared site mahzer. OP2 stated that there was no such occurrence happened and on inspection found that electricity consumption has been of 22462 watts instead of 7790 watts”. Thus on 23/01/2018 sent a notice to complainant directing to regularize the connected load and on checking the old meter fitted in his house by meter testing unit of OP, the old meter was found faulty and also found the meter reading shown in that meter was less than consumption of electricity. So the OP issued bill of the amount for actual electricity consumption the complainant and issued notice directed to remit the amount stated in the bill as per Electricity supply code Regulation Section 134(1). It is also stated that as per Regulation 153(5) (7) OPs have right to issue bill to customers to remit amount towards the actual consumption of electricity. Hence sum of Rs.34522m towards the remaining amount after deducting the account of the complainant already paid has been sent to the complainant between the period from 09/2016 to 08/2017. According to OPs, complainant is bound to remit such an amount and stated that there is no deficiency in service on their part. Hence prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
Complainant filed his chief affidavit and documents. He was examined as Pw1 and marked Ext.A1 to A3. Pw1 has been cross-examined by OP. The Assistant Engineer of OP2 filed his chief-affidavit on behalf of OPs and was examined as Pw1 and Ex B1 Ext.B8 documents were marked from the side of OP.
We have heard both the Learned counsels and perused the argument not e submitted by Learned counsel of OP and records available before us.
It is an admitted fact that electric connection was given to the complainant in the year 1999 having consumer No.3292. It is also an admitted fact that the electric connection was of 3 phase from the initial days.
Complainant’s allegation is that on September 2017, OP replaced the defect free electric meter from his house with a faulty meter and that is why, his electricity charge increased from Rs.2000 to Rs. 7000. It is also alleged that on the complaint reported to OP2, the employees of OP2 came to his house and due to the fault in fitting of test meter, the electric oven, washing machine etc. in his house were got damaged and on questening the said incident and on demanding damages of Rs.25000/- OP issued short assessment bill on 25/01/2018 for the period from 09/2016 to 08/2017.
On the other hand OP pleaded that the 1st electric meter fitted in the house of complainant on 1999 was became faulty and hence during 07/06/2016 to 26/08/2017 the consumption noted in the electric meter was ‘O’. Hence it was changed with a new defect free electric meter in his house. On getting complaint of complainant a test meter was fixed in parallel from 08/01/2018 to 16/01/2018 and found that the newly fixed electric meter on 26/08/2017 was not a faulty one. Further on test in the old meter by testing unit found it faulty and an inspection by OP2 on 09/01/2018 at the premises of complainant’s house noted that the complainant is using electricity consumption of 22462 watts instead of 7790 watts as per service connection agreement between the complainant with OPs and also the incident alleged by complainant was not correct. Hence issued Ext. B7 notice to complainant on 23/01/2018 demanded to regularize connected load and to pay remaining electricity charge Rs.34522 for a period from 10/2016 to 26/08/2017 during the period the meter showed less consumption reading than actual consumption. Also issued Ext.B8 short Assessment Bill as per Section 56 of electricity Act 2003.
OP produced Ext. B1 showing the bimonthly meter reading of old meter from 07/08/2015 to 07/02/2018. On perusal of Ext. B1 reveals that from 07/04/2016 to 08/08/2017 rate of consumption of electricity is taken as average of previous six months consumption ie 352 and on 26/08/2017 new meter placed then consumption from that date to 06/10/2017, reads as 566, from 06/10/2017 to 06/12/2017 as 922, and from 06/12/2017 to 07/02/2018 reads as 653. Hence from the consumption rate, we can realize that the old meter reading relates to consumption of electricity was not correct from 07/04/2016 to 26/082017. So replace of that meter with a new meter on 26/08/2017, by the 2nd OP is an essential action from the side of OP. Further on getting complaint from the complainant, fixing of parallel test meter on 08/01/2018 shows as per Ext B6 that meter constant and average voltage read as 234 to 236 range which reveals that the meter fixed on 26/08/2017 was not a faulty one. Further billing report (Ext.B6) obviously clears that the consumption of electricity by complainant and his family’s premises as average 19000 watts instead of 7900 watts. Further on thorough checking of Ext. B7 the site mahzer prepared by 2nd OP at the time of inspection conducted on 09/01/2018 after receiving complaint from the complainant, seen that electric equipments like A C (2 in Numbers), water heater (2 in Numbers), microwave oven, Refrigerator, Washing machine, water pump etc. are using by the complainant and all the said equipments are showing functioning. More over for substantiating the allegation of complainant that the above said electric devices became damage, no material evidence produced.
Hence from the above said circumstances issuance of Ext.A3 short assessment bill dated 25/01/2018 for a period from 10/2016 to 26/08/2017 is legally binding to the complainant. As per Section 56 (2) of Electricity Act 2003, electricity bill for a period of two years previous due to the date of receipt of bill by consumer can be recovered. From the perusal of the record (Ext.B8) it is evident that sum of Rs.9925 has been deducted which is the amount received from the complainant for the said months.
Further the as per electricity supply code regulation section 134(1), OP2 has issued prior notice to complainant from 10/2016 to 26/08/2017. Therefore we find that 2nd OP issued correct bill to the complainant and there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs. It is also to be noted that OP No.2 has done every necessary urgent actions after receiving complaints of the complainant as a consumer. Complainant failed to prove his allegation about the damage of his electric devices in his house due to the installation of testing meter parallel to the electric meter.
Hence considering the submissions from both sides, material placed on record in the light of the facts, circumstances and legal aspects of the case, we are of the view complaint fails and the complainant is bound to pay the short assessment bill dated 25/01/2018 issued by 2nd OP. The option is given to the complainant to deposit the said bill in two installments within two months from the date of receipt of this order.
In the result, complaint fails and hence it is dismissed, with a direction to the complainant to deposit the amount stated in Ext.A3 bill in two installments within two months from the date of receipt of this order before 2nd OP. No order as to cost.
Exts.
A1 - Complaint copy dated 09/01/2018
A2 - Reply send by OP dated 25/01/2018
A3 - Bill dated 25/01/2018
B1 - Faulty meter reading report 26/08/2017
B2 - Application of complainant 23/12/2017
B3 - Test meter report 08/01/2018
B4 - Application of complainant 09/01/2018
B5 - Site Mahzer 09/01/2018
B6 - Load survey report 16/01/2018
B7 - Information to load regularization 23/01/2018
B8 - Short assessment bill 25/01/2018
Sd/ Sd/ Sd/
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
Ravi Susha Molykutty Mathew Sajeesh K.P
(mnp)
/Forward by order/
Senior Superintendent
