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

Consumer Complaint No  :  23 of 2019

Date of Institution                      : 25.04.2019

Date of Decision               : 20.8.2019

Deepak Jain aged 39 years son of Surinder Kumar Jain, resident of Jain Mohalla, Patti, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran

                                                ...Complainant

Versus

1. Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited, The Mall Patiala through its Managing Director,
2. Executive Engineer, Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited Division Patti, District Tarn Taran,
3. Sub Divisional Officer, (SDO) Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited, Sub Division Patti No. 1, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran.

…Opposite Parties.

Complaint Under Section 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Quorum:               Sh. Charanjit Singh, President

Smt. Jaswinder Kaur, Member

For Complainant                     Sh. Deepak Jain inperson

For Opposite Parties               Sh. A.K.Sharma Advocate

ORDERS:

Charanjit Singh, President;

1        The complainant Deepak Jain has filed the present complaint under Section 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act (herein after called as 'the Act') against Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited The Mall Patiala through tis Managing Director and others (Opposite Parties) on the allegations of deficiency in service and negligence in service on the part of opposite parties with prayer to withdraw the Bill No. 50208524498 dated 26.3.2019 amounting to Rs. 44,592/- raised on the complainant by the opposite parties without any right, title or interest and to pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony and Rs. 20,000/- as litigation expenses.

2        The case of the complainant in brief is that an electric meter bearing its new account No. 3000258793 old account No. T42JM520245A category domestic for DPC is installed in the residential house of the complainant which is on the name of his uncle Darshan Kumar c/o Piara Lal Patwari situated at Jain Mohalla Patti, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran and the complainant has been using the above said DS electricity connection since a long time in the above said residential house and the complainant is paying all the electricity bills of the above said electric meter to the opposite parties regularly and is beneficiary and the complainant is consumer of the opposite parties. Previously, the bill for the above said connection was continuously sent to the complainant by the opposite parties in between Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. 2,500/- and the complainant has paid all the bills to the opposite parties. On 26.3.2019, the opposite party No. 3 has issued one Bill No. 50208524498 amounting to Rs. 60,220/- which is illegal, null and void, against law, against facts, time barred, without any prior notice with complete details and without intimation to the complainant and the same is against the standing instructions of Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited and the same is liable to be set aside/ cancelled and in the said Bill Sundry charges have been shown as Rs. 44,592/- which is against law, against facts being time barred which is allegedly old for the last more than five years and the complainant is not liable to pay any amount of alleged sundry charges without disclosing any complete detail. As per established law, the opposite parties cannot recover any alleged dues/ balance amount from the complainant which is more than five years old one and hence the alleged bill issued by the opposite party No. 3 is illegal, null and void and is liable to be set aside/cancelled and rejected. The opposite parties have not given any detail of amount to the complainant before adding the amount of Rs. 44,592/- as sundry charges in the bill in question.  The complainant approached the opposite parties many a times to the opposite parties and requested correct the Bill and not to recover any alleged amount of Sundry charges but of no avail. The complainant has suffered mental harassment and agony and huge loss. There is negligence in the service of the opposite parties. Feeling dissatisfied by the act and conduct of the opposite parties, the complainant perforce has filed this complaint against the opposite parties.  Alongwith the complaint, the complainant has placed on record his affidavit Ex-C-1 alogwith Bill dated 26.3.2019 Ex. C-2, Adhar Card Ex. C-3, self attested copy of driving license Ex. C- 4.

3        After formal admission of the complaint, notice was issued to Opposite Parties and Opposite Parties appeared through counsel and filed written version taking the preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. The complainant has suppressed material facts from this Forum. The complainant has got no locus standi and cause of action to file the present complaint. On merits, it was pleaded that the bill is legal and valid one and the complainant is liable for the same to the opposite parties. The complainant never suffered any loss as alleged. There is no negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and the opposite parties have denied the other contents of the complaint and prayer was made for dismissal of the complaint.   Alogwith the written version, the opposite parties have placed on record affidavit of Amritpal Singh SDO PSPCL Sub Division Patti No. 1 Ex. OPs/1.

4        The complainant has filed rejoinder and controverted the stand taken by the opposite parties in the written version and reiterated the stand as taken in the complaint.

5        We have heard the complainant and Ld. counsel for the opposite parties and have gone through the documents placed on the file by the parties.

6        The complainant contended that electric meter bearing its new account No. 3000258793 old account No. T42JM520245A category domestic for DPC is installed in the residential house of the complainant which is on the name of his uncle Darshan Kumar c/o Piara Lal Patwari situated at Jain Mohalla Patti, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran and the complainant has been using the above said DS electricity connection since a long time in the above said residential house and the complainant is paying all the electricity bills of the above said electric meter to the opposite parties regularly and is beneficiary and the complainant is consumer of the opposite parties. He further contended that the bill for the above said connection was continuously sent to the complainant by the opposite parties in between Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. 2,500/- and the complainant has paid all the bills to the opposite parties. On 26.3.2019, the opposite party No. 3 has issued one Bill No. 50208524498 Ex. C-2 amounting to Rs. 60,220/- which is illegal, null and void, against law, against facts, time barred, without any prior notice with complete details and without intimation to the complainant and the same is against the standing instructions of Punjab State Powers Corporation Limited and the same is liable to be set aside/ cancelled and in the said Bill Sundry charges have been shown as Rs. 44,592/- which is against law, against facts being time barred which is allegedly old for the last more than five years and the complainant is not liable to pay any amount of alleged sundry charges without disclosing any complete detail. As per established law, the opposite parties cannot recover  any alleged dues/ balance amount from the complainant which is more than five years old one and hence the alleged bill issued by the opposite party No. 3 is illegal, null and void and is liable to be set aside/cancelled and rejected. The opposite parties have not given any detail of amount to the complainant before adding the amount of Rs. 44,592/- as sundry charges in the bill in question.  He further contended that the complainant approached the opposite parties many a times to the opposite parties and requested correct the Bill and not to recover any alleged amount of Sundry charges but of no avail. The complainant further contended that he has suffered mental harassment and agony and huge loss. There is negligence in the service of the opposite parties.

7        On the other hands, Ld. counsel for the opposite parties contended that the present complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. The complainant has suppressed material facts from this Forum. The complainant has got no locus standi and cause of action to file the present complaint. He further contended that the bill is legal and valid one and the complainant is liable for the same to the opposite parties. The complainant never suffered any loss as alleged. There is no negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

8        In the present case, the opposite parties have pleaded that the amount mentioned in the Bill Ex. C-2 is arrears of the previous years.. But the opposite parties have failed to produce on record any other document showing the amount in question as arrears of bills of the complainant. On the other hands, the complainant argued that as per Electricity Supply Instruction Manual of opposite parties where regulation No. 93 is regarding payment of arrears not originally billed. Relevant regulation is reproduced hereunder:

Payment of Arrears not Originally Billed : 93.1 There may be certain cases where the consumer is billed for some of the dues relating to previous months/years or otherwise as arrears on account of under assessment/ unauthorized use of electricity or demand / load surcharge pointed out by Internal Auditor/ detected by the authorized officers either owing to negligence of the PSPCL employees or due to some defect in the metering equipment or due to application of wrong tariff/ multiplication factor or due to mistake in connection or other irregularities/malpractices etc. In all such cases, separate bills shall be issued giving complete details of the charges levied. Such charges shall be shown as arrears in the subsequent electricity bills regularly till the payment is made. Supplementary bills shall be issued separately giving complete details of the charges in regard to theft cases, slowness of meters, wrong connection of the meter and unauthorized use of electricity etc. In such cases, the copy of relevant instructions under which the charges have been levied shall also be supplied to the consumer for facilitating the quick disposal of cases by consumer forums if approached by the consumer.

93.2 Limitation: Under Section 56(2) of the Act, no sum due from any consumer shall be recoverable after the period of two year from the date when such sum became first due unless such sum has been shown continuously as recoverable as arrears of charges for electricity supplied.

9        The opposite parties have shown an amount of Rs. 44,592/- as sundry charges in the in the bill in question. The complainant contended that the opposite parties have not given detail of the Sundry charges before adding the same in the Bill of complainant. The complainant contended that no show cause notice before adding the said amount in the Sundry charges has been issued by the opposite parties to the complainant. The complainant has put reliance on citation 2016 (2) Consumer Law Today 429 titled as “Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited & Others Vs Dinesh Sharma” wherein it is held that Electricity-Sundry charges cannot be charged without show cause notice to complainant. Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g)-electricity-Sundry charges added in electricity bill of complainant-Held-No show cause notice issued to the complainant before imposing penalty-OPs have miserably failed to show that provisional assessment made on the basis of audit report was ever served upon the complainant-In this way, they did not act as per provisions contained in the Electricity Act and it is deficiency in service-Consumer can ask the service provider to give him the details on the basis of which the demand is made, which is not in the present case. Para 7-The appellants have failed to show any notice issued to the complainant before imposing the penalty. Our Hon’ble High Court has also opined in “Punjab State Electricity Board and another Vs Ashwani Kumar 1993 (2) PLR 447” that notice is required before imposing the penalty and an order about person who was likely to be affected thereby. Consumer can ask the service provider to give him the details on the basis of which the demand is made, which is not in the present case.

10      Further as per their own regulations and instructions, opposite parties cannot charge any amount of previous dues or arrears without giving any supplementary bill or notice giving complete detail of charges and also giving copy of relevant instructions in which the charges have been levied. They cannot disconnect the connection of the complainant on the basis of arrears/ dues of more than 2 years and in the present case, the opposite parties have failed to produce any evidence or document which proves that they issued any supplementary bill or notice giving complete and full detail of the defaulting amount. Therefore, we are fully convinced with the arguments and case law produced by complainant. It also creates doubt on the part of the opposite parties why they remain mum for a long period.