ORDER

15.12.2023

1. A complaint under Section 12 & 14 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 filed. In brief the facts are that the complainant is the user of electricity connection vide its no. 41200106496. It is stated that the complainant is good pay master and is paying regular consumption bills raised by the OP as and when received by the complainant and there is nothing due against the said connection. It is further stated that complainant never misused the electricity other than its sanctioned purpose or extended the other premise other than its sanctioned premise.
2. It is stated that initially sanctioned load of the complainant was 1 KW and the OP arbitrarily and illegally increased the sanctioned load to 7 KW on 09.12.2010 while there are no such a load and complainant does not consume electricity for a load of 7 KW and excess amount charged from the complainant amount be refunded from 09.12.2010 to till date of reducing the load and realizing to the complainant with interest.
3. It is stated that the complainant received a bill No. 1103407429 in the month of March, 2011 for Rs. 5260/- and in this bill OP mentioned Rs. 5,000/- under the head “Other Charges”, if any, he had to pay under threat of disconnect the supply. It is further stated that NDPL has sent a bill no. 10040457629 in the month of September, 2011 of Rs. 5470/- and in this bill NDPL mentioned Rs. 5,000/- once again under the head “Other Charges” if any, without giving any justification or without giving any notice or opportunity to put his version on this huge and illegal charges. It is stated that complainant visited office of the OP to know about these illegal and huge demands but no response. It is further stated that complainant paid the entire amount bill with this illegal demand under threat of disconnect the supply, hence, OP violated rules and regulations of UERC Electricity Act, 2003 and the act of OP is a brazen example of high handedness due to monopoly attitude.
4. It is stated that complainant visited several time to the office of the OP but no response. Complainant wrote letters and he has also sent a legal notice through his counsel but neither replied nor withdraw/remove the huge, wrong and illegal amount. It is further stated that the aforesaid act of the OP is illegal, unwanted, improper and arbitrary and against principal of natural justice and amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. It is further stated that due to acts of OP the complainant left no other remedy except to approach this Hon’ble Commission.
5. It is stated that the complainant visited several time to the office of OP but they did not pay any heed and not interesting for removing the problem regarding wrong bill  and threatening to disconnect the supply in case of non deposition of the assessed amount. It is further submitted that the above mentioned bill carries forward all the mistakes, negligence committed by the OP which needs to be rectified along with complete waiver of the LPSC, if any.
6. It is stated that negligence to give justification or removing the huge and illegal amount on the request of the complainant. Denials of rectification of errors in the bill are serious negligence and deficiency in service hence bill should be null and void and compensate the complainant on account of deficiency in service physical and mental harassment.
7. The complainant is seeking to adjust/refund the huge and illegal amount of Rs.10,000/- which was received under threat of disconnect the supply and pay interest at this amount as per law, to reduce the load from 7 KW to 2 KW as the consumption/load is actually below 2 KW since the date of order by this Hon’ble Forum, to refund the amount with interest which is being charged from 09.12.2010 to till date of realizing the amount/reducing the load, to not to disconnect the electricity supply till the disposal of this case through K No.41200 10649, to pay the compensation for physical and mental harassment and pay litigation charges and any other order which this Forum may deems fit and proper.
8. OP filed WS and taken preliminary objections that the present complaint filed by complainant is not maintainable in view of the fact that no cause of action ever arose in favour of the complainant and against the answering respondent. All the allegations mentioned in the complain are false, frivolous and only with a view to misguide the Hon’ ble Forum.
9. It is stated that the consumer for a constituted under the Consumer Protection Act would have jurisdiction to entertain only the complaint filed by the consumer of electricity alleging any defect or deficiency in the supply of the electricity. However, in this particular matter no deficiency or defect in supply has been contended by the complainant therefore, same does not fall under section 2(1)(iii) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as CPA). It is stated that the present complaint is not maintainable as the relief claimed does not come under the purview of Section 14 of CPA. It is stated that the present complaint is frivolous and vexatious in nature as same has been filed merely to restore the connection hence same is liable to be dismissed in accordance with section-26 of CPA.
10. It is stated that present complain is related addition/imposition of Rs.5000/- on two occasions in the accounts of the complainant reflected in the bill no.1103407429 for month of march 2011 and bill no.10040457629 for the month of September 2011 on account of illegal restoration charges against electricity connection bearing K no.41200106496(CA no.60000401517). It is further stated that the charges have been imposed in accordance with section 138 of electricity act 2003 as the supply against the connection was disconnected on 04.01.2011 and again on 09.03.2011 on the account of outstanding dues.
11. It is stated that the connection on both occasions was unauthorizedly/illegally restored by consumer, therefore, in accordance with provisions of law amount of Rs.5000/- added. The complainant also found to be indulged in dishonest abstraction of energy in the inspection dated 12.07.2010 and consequently a bill of Rs.40,000/- was issued which was subsequently settled by the consumer. It is stated that the sanctioned load of the connection of the complainant is 7KW for domestic light.
12. On merit all the allegations denied by the OP and reiterated the contents of preliminary objections.
13. Complainant filed replication to the WS of OP and denied all the allegations made by OP and reiterated contents of complaint. It is stated that initial sanctioned load of the complainant was 1 KW and OP arbitrarily and illegally increased the sanctioned load to 7 KW and letter dated 31.10.2012 and 16.07.2013 was issued in the name of complainant by OP to reduce the sanctioned load to 1 KW on the basis of consumption of 0.42KW during the month of January 2012, 0.46KW in the month of july 2011 and 0.52KW in the month of September 2011.
14. It is stated that even during the pendency of case no.5289/2011 the complainant has been forced to pay two bills dated 02.03.2011 of Rs.5260/- and dated 14.09.2011 of Rs.5470/- despite the fact the same were overcharged. Complainant stated that complaint may be allowed.
15. Complainant filed evidence by way of his affidavit and reiterated facts of complaint. Complainant relied on photocopy of voter ID card Ex.CW1/1, copy of illegal bill no.1012766173 for Rs.40,572/- Ex.CW1/2, copy of stay order dated 13.03.2011 Ex.CW1/3, copy of bill no.1103407429 of Rs.5260/- Ex.CW1/4, copy of deposited amount on 19.03.2011 Ex.CW1/5, copy of bill no.10040457629 of Rs.5470/- Ex.CW1/6, copy of letter dated 21.09.2011 served to OP Ex.CW1/7, copy of disconnection notice Ex.CW1/8, copy of legal notice dated 20.12.2011 served to OP Ex.CW1/9.
16. OP filed evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. Ashish Bhatnagar working in the office of OP. OP relied on copy of statement of account Ex.DW1/1 and copy of disconnection order Ex.DW1/3.
17. Written arguments filed by complainant as well as OP.
18. We have heard Sh. M.K Gill counsel for complainant and Sh. Harish Purohit AR for OP.
19. The complainant initially filed complaint for adjustment/refund of Rs.10,000/- and direction to restrain OP from disconnection of electricity through K No.41200106496. The electricity bill filed on record by complainant of September 2011, bill November 2011 specifically mentioned sanctioned load 7KW.  In the bill of September 2011 Rs.5000/- have been charged in addition to regular consumption bill. The OP explained that in the month of March 2011 and September 2011 the electricity was illegally restored therefore, as per provisions of law Rs.5000/- were imposed. The complainant denied that he was not indulged in DAE case on the basis of inspection dated 12.07.2010.  On the contrary in the affidavit dated 12.01.2018 complainant admitted the DAE case and exhibited bill of Rs.40,572/- Ex.CW1/2 and also filed stay order dated 13.03.2011 Ex.CW1/3. The complainant has making wrong statements and concealing the true facts from the commission. The complainant indulged in illegal restoration of electricity and DAE case therefore, other charges of Rs.5000/- each payable by complainant which were imposed as per provision of law by the OP. The complainant after seven years of the pendency of the complaint by way of amendment sought the relief for reduction of load from 7KW to 2 KW. We are of considered opinion that the complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application before OP in this regard and in the present circumstances this commission cannot direct the OP to reduce the sanctioned load.
20. On the basis of above observation and discussion, present complaint is dismissed. No order as to cost. File be consigned to record room.
21. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost as per order dated 04.04.2022 of Hon’ble State Commission after receiving the application from the parties in the registry.

Sanjay Kumar                                                                   Rajesh

                 President                                                                          Member