Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Room No. 208 2^nd Floor, District Administrative Complex, Tarn Taran

Consumer Complaint No  :   08 of 2017

Date of Institution                      :   02.03.2017

Date of Decision               :   14.03.2019

Baljinder Singh son of Mohinder Singh resident of Ward No. 2 Amritsar Road Patti.

                                                                             …..Complainant

                             Versus

S.D.O Punjab State Powers Corporation Ltd. Sub Division Patti I

                                                                             …Opposite Party

Complaint Under Section  12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act .

Quorum:               Sh. Charanjit Singh, President

Smt. Jaswinder Kaur, Member

                             Sh. Jatinder Singh Pannu, Member

For Complainant                     Sh. H.S. Sandhu Advocate.

For Opposite Party                           Exparte.

ORDERS:

Charanjit Singh, President;

1        The complainant Baljinder Singh has filed the present complaint under Section 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act (herein after called   as 'the Act') against S.D.O Punjab State Powers Corporation Ltd. Sub Division Patti I (Opposite party) on the allegations of deficiency in service and negligence in service on the part of the opposite party with further prayer to direct the opposite party not to demand illegal amount of Rs. 26,000/- from the complainant and to update the official record in respect of the disputed electricity connection and not to recover any amount from the complainant in any manner and not to disconnect the connection in dispute and also prayed Rs. 5,500/- as litigation charges and Rs. 25,000/- as compensation.

2        The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant is a law abiding citizen of India and a running a small motor mechanic workshop at Patti which is his sole source of livelihood. At this workshop, he is using electricity of the opposite party being consumer through electricity connection having account No.3000256834, consumer No. T42BR291279A and meter No. 10230496 and this meter was installed by the opposite party at his workshop in the year 2011. The complainant was never defaulter of any bills of electricity and he owed nothing to the opposite party for his consumption. The complainant received one bill dated 17.02.2012 for the consumption of electricity from the opposite party and was astonished to see that the meter status in the bill was given Code “R” i.e. meter burnt but actually the meter was ‘Ok’ and this code was mentioned wrongly by the meter reader of the opposite party, so the complainant approached the opposite party and it was admitted by him that the meter was ok and wrong code has been mentioned on this bill, so after verification the opposite party mentioned through his handwriting on the bill itself “Meter Ok” and the complainant paid the bill of Rs.16,610/-. The complainant received bills dated 10.05.2012, 18.07.2012 on average consumption basis from the opposite party and paid the same as the opposite party had not changed the meter as it was OK but did not record the meter reading and the average bills were as per his previous consumption.  The complainant had in all paid Rs.26,610/- to the opposite party in total for the average consumption bills and this amount was entered into the computer data of the opposite party in the account of the complainant and the opposite party through its “AR” had demanded Rs.27,020/- from the complainant being the difference between the actual  bills of the complainant as per the reading which was taken from the meter installed and the actual paid by the complainant to the opposite party. This amount of Rs.27,020/- was paid by the complainant vide receipt dated 22.10.2012 and as such, after this period the meter was being checked for reading and the previous adjustment were made by the opposite party in its record. After this period, no difference was there between the reading of the meter, the price for the consumption and payment made by the complainant to the opposite party. The complainant had been paying his bills since then but during the year 2015 the amount already adjusted and paid by the complainant to the opposite party again started appearing in the bills of the opposite party and the complainant had to approach the opposite party through its AR for correction of the bills and the same were corrected by the A.R. in the bills dated 05.12.2015 and 06.01.2016 and the AR signed those bills after correcting them on the directions of opposite party and the actual consumption bills after correction were paid by the complainant to the opposite party and the same was also entered into the computer data by the opposite party and made upto date and receipt was  also supplied to the complainant by the opposite party with the signatures of AR of the opposite party on 16.12.2016 and as such the record of the opposite party was also corrected by it. Again the complainant received a bill from the opposite party which was to be paid by the complainant through cash on 16.01.2017, in which already adjusted amount was asked from the complainant by the opposite party and again the complainant has approached to the opposite party for correction of this bill and which was corrected by the AR of the opposite party and he also put his signatures on it after correcting it and an amount of Rs.6,385/- was paid to the opposite party by the complainant vide receipt dated 20.01.2017. The complainant had been approaching the opposite party since 2015 requesting him not to demand the already paid amount to him by the complainant during adjustment of the average and actual bills due to wrong code “R” in the bills already discussed above but inspite of that the opposite party did not give any heed to his requests and had been demanding the same adjusted and paid amount from the complainant again and again. The complainant was embarrassed when the audit department of the opposite party and the opposite party again started demanding Rs.26,000/- from the complainant i.e. the alleged arrears from the complainant for his consumption of electricity of the opposite party. The complainant pleaded that it is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  Feeling dissatisfied by the act and conduct of the opposite party, the complainant perforce has filed this complaint against the opposite party.

3        Notice of this complaint was sent to the opposite party but no one appeared on behalf of opposite party and consequently, the opposite party was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 18.4.2017.

4        In order to prove his case, Ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex. C-1 alongwith documents Ex. C-2 to Ex. C-20 and closed his evidence.

5        We have heard the Ld. counsel for complainant and have also carefully gone through the evidence and documents on the file.

6        The complainant has produced on record affidavit of Baljinder Singh complainant and declared that the complainant is a law abiding citizen of India and a running a small motor mechanic workshop at Patti which is his sole source of livelihood. At this workshop, he is using electricity of the opposite party being consumer through electricity connection having account No.3000256834, consumer No. T42BR291279A and meter No. 10230496 and this meter was installed by the opposite party at his workshop in the year 2011. The complainant was never defaulter of any bills of electricity and he owed nothing to the opposite party for his consumption. The complainant received one bill dated 17.02.2012 for the consumption of electricity from the opposite party and was astonished to see that the meter status in the bill was given Code “R” i.e. meter burnt but actually the meter was ‘Ok’ and this code was mentioned wrongly by the meter reader of the opposite party, so the complainant approached the opposite party and it was admitted by him that the meter was ok and wrong code has been mentioned on this bill, so after verification the opposite party mentioned through his handwriting on the bill itself “Meter Ok” and the complainant paid the bill of Rs.16,610/-. The complainant received bills dated 10.05.2012, 18.07.2012 on average consumption basis from the opposite party and paid the same as the opposite party had not changed the meter as it was OK but did not record the meter reading and the average bills were as per his previous consumption.  The complainant had in all paid Rs.26,610/- to the opposite party in total for the average consumption bills and this amount was entered into the computer data of the opposite party in the account of the complainant and the opposite party through its “AR” had demanded Rs.27,020/- from the complainant being the difference between the actual  bills of the complainant as per the reading which was taken from the meter installed and the actual paid by the complainant to the opposite party. This amount of Rs.27,020/- was paid by the complainant vide receipt dated 22.10.2012 and as such, after this period the meter was being checked for reading and the previous adjustment were made by the opposite party in its record. After this period, no difference was there between the reading of the meter, the price for the consumption and payment made by the complainant to the opposite party. The complainant had been paying his bills since then but during the year 2015 the amount already adjusted and paid by the complainant to the opposite party again started appearing in the bills of the opposite party and the complainant had to approach the opposite party through its AR for correction of the bills and the same were corrected by the A.R. in the bills dated 05.12.2015 and 06.01.2016 and the AR signed those bills after correcting them on the directions of opposite party and the actual consumption bills after correction were paid by the complainant to the opposite party and the same was also entered into the computer data by the opposite party and made upto date and receipt was  also supplied to the complainant by the opposite party with the signatures of AR of the opposite party on 16.12.2016 and as such the record of the opposite party was also corrected by it. Again the complainant received a bill from the opposite party which was to be paid by the complainant through cash on 16.01.2017, in which already adjusted amount was asked from the complainant by the opposite party and again the complainant has approached to the opposite party for correction of this bill and which was corrected by the AR of the opposite party and he also put his signatures on it after correcting it and an amount of Rs.6,385/- was paid to the opposite party by the complainant vide receipt dated 20.01.2017. The complainant had been approaching the opposite party since 2015 requesting him not to demand the already paid amount to him by the complainant during adjustment of the average and actual bills due to wrong code “R” in the bills already discussed above but inspite of that the opposite party did not give any heed to his requests and had been demanding the same adjusted and paid amount from the complainant again and again. The complainant was embarrassed when the audit department of the opposite party and the opposite party again started demanding Rs.26,000/- from the complainant i.e. the alleged arrears from the complainant for his consumption of electricity of the opposite party. The complainant pleaded that it is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  The complainant has also proved on record documents receipt Ex. C-2, Electricity Bill Ex. C-3,  receipt Ex. C-4, electricity bill Ex. C-5 receipt Ex. C-6,  receipt Ex. C-8, C-10, Electricity Bill Ex. C-11,  electricity bill and receipt Ex. C-12,  receipt Ex. C-13, representation dated 17.12.2015 Ex. C-14, Electricity Bill Ex. C-15 receipt Ex. C-16, Electricity Bill Ex. C-17, electricity bill Ex. C-18, electricity bill and receipt Ex. C-19, representation Ex. C-20.

7        The evidence led by the complainant on the file goes unchallenged and unrebutted as Opposite Party is proceeded against exparte in the present complaint and there is no reason on the file as to why the evidence produced by the complainant be not believed. Otherwise also, due notice was issued to the Opposite Party and opposite party refused to receive the same and has not appeared in the Forum in order to contest the complaint which shows that the Opposite Party has nothing to say upon the allegations leveled against him by the complainant. As such, the complainant is entitled to the relief claimed in the complaint and it stands established on record that the complainant is approaching the opposite party several times but he opposite party did not care to resolve the matter, not only committed deficiency in service, but also indulged in an unfair trade practice.             

8        In light of the above discussion, the complaint succeeds and the same is hereby allowed with costs in favour of the complainant and against the Opposite Party. The opposite party is directed to update the official record in respect of the disputed electricity connection of the complainant and give the detail in writing to the complainant of his account. If any amount in excess is received by the opposite party from the complainant, same be adjourned in the next bills of the complainant.  The complainant is also entitled to Rs.3,000/- ( Rs. Three Thousand only) as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony and Rs 2,500/- ( Rs. Two thousand and five hundred only) as litigation expenses. Opposite Party is directed to comply with the order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which the complainant is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum, on the awarded amount, from the date of complaint till its realisation.  Copy of order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to record room.