ORDERS:

Charanjit Singh, President

1        The complainant has filed the present complaint by invoking the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 under Section 12 and 13  against the opposite party on the allegations that the complainant is a farmer and one domestic electricity connection bearing account No. T61LP831296L is installed at her residential house situated at above said address. The complainant had been paying for the consumption of the electricity/ power to the opposite party without any default. Although no arrears were there in the previous bills of her domestic electric connection are there in the previous bill dated 3.4.2018 by way of which the opposite party had demanded Rs. 10,900/- for the electricity consumed by the complainant and the complainant with the permission of the opposite party deposited only Rs. 4,000/- of the arrears of the above said bill are due towards the complainant actually. The complainant was astonished to see when she received a bill No. 966 dated 14.7.2018 of her domestic electricity connection previously discussed and vide this bill the opposite party demanded arrears of Rs. 70,717/- from the complainant but the complainant knew that except Rs.4,000/- no other arrear were due towards her of the electricity consumed by her. No previous bill she had received ever was having any description of any such arrears and as such, the complainant went to the opposite party to inquire about the bill dated 14.7.2018 and also to inquire about Rs. 70,717/- which has been demanded by the opposite party from her. The opposite party informed the complainant by opening her account with him and told the complainant that arrears of Rs.  70,717/-  are actually the arrears of the electricity connection that was being run in the name of Mohinder Singh of village Lalpura. The complainant told the opposite party that she had no concern whatsoever with any Mohinder Singh of her village. The complainant also told the opposite party that the opposite party cannot claim any arrears of any third person through the bill issued to her and also told him that she is not liable for any such arrears demanded by the opposite party. The opposite party told the complainant that Mohinder Singh has since died and as such, it has no other option except to recover the arrears mentioned above from her and the complainant told the opposite party that this is an illegal demand and she is not responsible for any such arrears of a third person. The complainant has prayed that the bill dated 966 dated 14.7.2018 issued by the opposite party qua the arrears of Rs. 70,717/- alongwith the consumption amount totaling Rs. 75,205/- may kindly be ordered to be declared as null, void, illegal and quashed being without any basis. The opposite party may be directed to update the official record in respect of the disputed electricity connection. The opposite party may be restrained from recovering any amount from the complainant. The complainant has also prayed Rs. 15,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5,500/- as litigation expenses. Alongwith the complaint, the complainant has placed on record her affidavit Ex. C-1, Self attested copy of Electricity Bill No. 966 dated 14.7.2018 Ex. C-2, self attested copy of Bill dated 3.4.2018 Ex. C-3, elf attested copy of receipt dated 23.3.2018 Ex. C-4, Self attested copy of Adhar Card is Ex. C-5.

2        Notice of this complaint was sent to the opposite party and opposite party appeared through counsel and filed written version by alleging that the complainant should prove by way of documentary evidence about her making payment of consumption charges. So far as, the payment of Rs. 6,000/- out of Rs. 10,900/- is concerned the complainant had made payment of Rs. 6,000/- by way of installments and Rs. 4,900/- was and is still due as arrears and not only Rs. 4,000/- as wrongly and falsely stated by the complainant in this para. The amount claimed through the bill of Rs. 70,717/- (wrongly written as  70,0717) including Rs. 62,234/- of the amount due by way of consumption charges from account No. LP83/103 in the name of Mohinder Singh son of Sewa Singh and father of Balwinder Singh and accordingly a notice vide memo No. 595 dated 12.3.2018 was issued to the complainant and which was duly received by her. Through this notice demand of Rs. 62,343/- was raised but the complainant inspite of receiving the said notice has neither replied the said notice nor any payment has been made by her. Only Rs. 62,343/- was due from Mohinder Singh and as claimed through notice dated 12.3.2018 received by complainant herself.  The complainant is residing in the same house/ premises, which was owned and possessed by Mohinder Singh and as such, she is liable for making payment of amount. Under rules the complainant being in occupation of the house owned by Mohinder Singh father of Balwinder Singh and now in possession of the complainant, she is fully liable for making payment of the amount claimed. So much so, the complainant has even defaulted in making payment of the current consumption charges. The opposite party has denied the other contents of the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. The opposite party has placed on record copy of notice dated 12.3.2018 Ex. OP-1, Copy of Report dated 9.3.2018 Ex. OP-2, Affidavit of Rajbir Singh SDO PSPCL Fatehabad Ex. OP-3.

3        We have heard the Ld. counsel for parties and have also carefully gone through the documents on the file.

4        The case of the opposite party is that the amount claimed through the bill of Rs. 70,717/- including Rs. 62,234/- of the amount due is of consumption charges from account No. LP83/103 in the name of Mohinder Singh son of Sewa Singh and father of Balwinder Singh. Accordingly a notice vide memo No. 595 dated 12.3.2018 (Ex. OP-1) was issued to the complainant. Through this notice demand of Rs. 62,343/- was raised but the complainant inspite of receiving the said notice has neither replied the said notice nor any payment has been made by her. Only Rs. 62,343/- was due from Mohinder Singh as claimed through notice dated 12.3.2018 received by complainant herself.  The complainant is residing in the same house/ premises, which was owned and possessed by Mohinder Singh and as such, she is liable for making payment of amount. Under rules the complainant being in occupation of the house owned by Mohinder Singh father of Balwinder Singh and now in possession of the complainant, she is fully liable for making payment of the amount claimed. On the other hands, it is the case of the complainant that the opposite party informed the complainant by opening her account with him and told the complainant that arrears of Rs.  70,717/- are actually the arrears of the electricity connection that was being run in the name of Mohinder Singh of village Lalpura. The complainant had no concern whatsoever with any Mohinder Singh of her village. The opposite party cannot claim any arrears of any third person through the bill issued to her and also told him that she is not liable for any such arrears demanded by the opposite party. Memo No. 595 dated 12.3.2018 Ex. OP-1 shows that Rs. 62,343/- relates to account No. LP83/103 and the account Number of the complainant is T61LP831296L. The aforesaid discussion leads to the conclusion that the complainant is having domestic electricity connection bearing account No.T61LP831296L whereas as per version of the opposite party they are demanding Rs. 62,343/- of account No. LP83/103 of one Mohinder Singh son of Sewa Singh. It has been established on record that the arrears of that account No. LP83/103 have been added in the account of complainant bearing No. T61LP831296L. If the complainant was allotted new connection, then it was the duty of the Opposite Parties at the time of issuing new electricity connection to ensure that no arrears was outstanding against the previous consumer of the same premises. Assuming if said Balwinder Singh was in arrears then it was for the Opposite Parties to effect the recovery  through any lawful way as prescribed under the rules. Moreover, there is no relationship of complainant and said Balwinder Singh. It is settled proposition of the law that any amount outstanding against one electricity connection cannot be added in the bill of another connection. We are strengthened by the view expressed in case Punjab State Electricity Board Vs. Gurjit Kaur 2004(1) CLT-622. On the other hand, no rule, regulation/ instructions or law has been shown by the ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties  that the arrears of other consumer could be added in the bill of another consumer.  We are of the view that by use of  such type of the tactics of unfair trade practice amounts to put the consumer in embarrassing position. In the instant case, the complainant has made so many visits to the office of Opposite Parties for correction of his account, but the Opposite Parties  did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant and the complainant was forced to file this complaint for the redressal of his grievances. Obviously, the complainant would have undergone mental harassment and agony and inconvenience without any reasonable cause.

5        In view of above said discussion, we are of the view that the instant complaint has merits and the same is accepted. The demand of arrears of Rs.62,343/- dated 12.3.2018 vide memo Ex. OP-1 is hereby set aside. The Opposite Parties  are directed to issue the fresh bill to the complainant on the basis of actual consumption excluding the aforementioned amount and correct its record accordingly. However, the Opposite Parties  are at liberty to recover the disputed amount, if any, from said Mohinder Singh son of Sewa Singh or any other person as per law/ rules.  Amount, if any, deposited by the complainant during the pendency of the present case with the opposite parties out of amount in question, either to return to the complainant or adjusted in his future bills. Complainant is also entitled to Rs.4,000/- (Rs. Four Thousand only) as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony and Rs 3,000/- (Rs Three Thousand only) as litigation expenses. Opposite Parties are 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.

Announced in Open Commission.

18.8.2021