Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Room No. 208 2nd Floor, District Administrative Complex, Tarn Taran
Consumer Complaint No : 28 of 2018
Date of Institution : 20.03.2018
Date of Decision : 09.05.2019
Sanjeev Sood son of Lakh Parkash resident of Jhabal Adda District Tarn Taran..
…..Complainant
Versus
SDO Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Sub Division Jhabal, District Tarn Taran.
…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 Sanjeev Sood has filed the present complaint under Section 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act (herein after called as 'the Act') against SDO Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Sub Division Jhabal, District Tarn Taran (Opposite party) on the allegations of deficiency in service and negligence in service on the part of the opposite party with further prayer that the bill dated 17.4.2017 issued by the opposite party may be ordered to be declared as null, void, illegal and amount of Rs. 59,990/- as claimed through the bill may kindly be set aside / quashed and opposite party may be directed to update the official record in respect of the disputed electricity connection. The complainant has also prayed Rs. 25,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation expenses.
2 The case of the complainant in brief is that he was running a mechanical work shop at Adda Jhabal District Tarn Taran and for obtaining supply of energy/ electricity, he obtained one SP Connection from the opposite party having connection No. T21SP520295A in his name to be installed at his mechanical work shop which was the sole livelihood of the complainant. Due to some factors, the work at the mechanical work shop was stopped by the complainant but the above mentioned connection was not cancelled and disconnected by the complainant as he was expecting to restart the work at the workshop in future and the complainant had been paying the average electricity bills/ rent as the consumption at the work shop of the electricity was approximately nil due to non-use of energy at the work shop. The reading of the electricity meter installed at the work shop was actually nil but the electricity meter started showing enormous reading of KVAH although the consumption reading was nil as displayed of the meter and as such the complainant came to know that there has arisen a defect in the meter of the opposite party installed at the work shop and as such, the complainant moved an application for challenging the meter by depositing the challenge fee on 8.6.2016 vide receipt No. 087 and the opposite party removed the meter and took it to its office and also told the complainant that it will be checked within 7 days in the M.E. Lab at Amritsar and the complainant will be called before checking the meter in the laboratory and it will be checked in the presence of the complainant. The opposite party installed a new meter at the workshop after removing the challenged one and the new meter started showing nil KVAH reading on it as there was no consumption of the electricity and it also proved that the removed meter was defective. The complainant did not pay any bill after paying the challenge fee till date. The opposite party never called the complainant to be present at the M.E. Lab for checking of the meter within 7 days of removing it, rather the opposite party called the complainant in the month of December 2016 for checking the meter in his presence but as the meter could not be checked for its defects after 7 days of removing it as the Data from the meter could not be retrieved from the meter and as such, the meter could not be checked after 6 months of its removal from the work shop and as such, the meter was never checked due to technical mistake on the part of the opposite party. The complainant did not pay any bill to the opposite party after June 2017, rather the opposite party did not disconnect the connection of the complainant himself and same was disconnected in the month of March 2017 and it was also lapse on the part of the opposite party as the SP connection is to be disconnected instantly when the consumer of SP Connection become defaulter of the electricity bills and it also proves that the opposite party had been believing that the removed electricity connection was defective and as such there is no need to disconnect the connection of the complainant, although the opposite party disconnected it in the month of March 2017 on its own. The complainant in the mean time had been receiving electricity bills and the last electricity bill received by the complainant on 17.4.2017 by of which the opposite party demanded Rs. 59,990/- from the complainant without any justification as the consumption on this meter was actually near about nil and also the meter status was also ‘OK’ the complainant was very much embarrassed to see this demand from him as the challenged meter which was removed by the opposite party was never tested within the time frame it had to be checked and as such, it proved that the removed meter was defective and KVH reading shown by that meter was actually false due to defect in the meter and as such, the complainant was not required to be demanded any amount as demanded in the bill dated 17.4.2017. The alleged bill amount including the alleged arrears demanded in the bill dated 17.4.2017 are illegal and factitious and as such is an un-authorised demand from the complainant. The complainant went to the opposite party and requested to recall its demand vide bill dated 17.4.2017 of an amount of Rs. 59,990/- but all in vain and the opposite party told the complainant that he has to pay this amount immediately. 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 and previously Sh. K.M. Gupta Advocate filed memo of appearance but later on neither filed power of attorney nor appear on behalf of opposite party. Consequently, the opposite party was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 19.6.2018 of this Forum.
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-5 and closed the 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 tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex. C-1 and in his affidavit he pleaded that he was running a mechanical work shop at Adda Jhabal District Tarn Taran and for obtaining supply of energy/ electricity, he obtained one SP Connection from the opposite party having connection No. T21SP520295A in his name to be installed at his mechanical work shop which was the sole livelihood of the complainant. Due to some factors, the work at the mechanical work shop was stopped by the complainant but the above mentioned connection was not cancelled and disconnected by the complainant as he was expecting to restart the work at the workshop in future and the complainant had been paying the average electricity bills/ rent as the consumption at the work shop of the electricity was approximately nil due to nonuse of energy at the work shop. The reading of the electricity meter installed at the work shop was actually nil but the electricity meter started showing enormous reading of KVAH although the consumption reading was nil as displayed of the meter and as such the complainant came to know that there has arisen a defect in the meter of the opposite party installed at the work shop and as such, the complainant moved an application for challenging the meter by depositing the challenge fee on 8.6.2016 vide receipt No. 087 and the opposite party removed the meter and receipt is Ex. Ex. C-2 and took it to its office and also told the complainant that it will be checked within 7 days in the M.E. Lab at Amritsar and the complainant will be called before checking the meter in the laboratory and it will be checked in the presence of the complainant. The opposite party installed a new meter at the workshop after removing the challenged one and the new meter started showing nil KVAH reading on it as there was no consumption of the electricity. The complainant did not pay any bill after paying the challenge fee till date. The opposite party never called the complainant to be present at the M.E. Lab for checking of the meter within 7 days of removing it, rather the opposite party called the complainant in the month of December 2016 for checking the meter in his presence but as the meter could not be checked for its defects after 7 days of removing it as the Data from the meter could not be retrieved from the meter and as such, the meter could not be checked after 6 months of its removal from the work shop and as such, the meter was never checked due to technical mistake on the part of the opposite party. The complainant did not pay any bill to the opposite party after June 2017, rather the opposite party did not disconnect the connection of the complainant himself and disconnected it in the month of March 2017 and it was also lapse on the part of the opposite party as the SP connection is to be disconnected instantly when the consumer of SP Connection become defaulter of the electricity bills and it also proves that the opposite party had been believing that the removed electricity connection was defective and as such there is no need to disconnect the connection of the complainant, although the opposite party disconnected it in the month of March 2017 on its own. The complainant in the meantime had been receiving electricity bills and the last electricity bill received by the complainant on 17.4.2017 by of which the opposite party demanded Rs. 59,990/- from the complainant without any justification as the consumption on this meter was actually near about nil and also the meter status was also ‘OK’ the complainant was very much embarrassed to see this demand from him as the challenged meter which was removed by the opposite party was never tested within the time frame it had to be checked and as such, it proved that the removed meter was defective and KVH reading shown by that meter was actually false due to defect in the meter and as such, the complainant was not required to be demanded any amount as demanded in the bill dated 17.4.2017. The alleged bill amount including the alleged arrears demanded in the bill dated 17.4.2017 are illegal and factitious and as such is an un-authorised demand from the complainant. The complainant went to the opposite party and requested to recall its demand vide bill dated 17.4.2017 of an amount of Rs. 59,990/-
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 previously opposite party appeared through counsel and counsel filed memo of appearance on behalf of opposite party and later on none has appeared on behalf of opposite party in order to contest the complaint which shows that the Opposite Party has nothing to say upon the allegations leveled against it 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 the opposite party did not care to resolve the matter, not only committed deficiency in service, but also indulged in an unfair trade practice. Moreover, before adding the amount in the bill, the opposite party has not given any notice to the complainant consisting the detail of the amount mentioned in the bill in question.
8 In light of the above discussion, the complaint succeeds and the same is hereby allowed exparte with costs in favour of the complainant and against the Opposite Party. The Bill dated 17.4.2017 for 59,990/- is hereby quashed. The amount, if any, deposited by the complainant out of the above said amount be adjusted in the next bills of the complainant. The complainant is liable for the consumption charges to the opposite party. The complainant has been harassed by the opposite party. The complainant is also entitled to Rs. 5,000/- ( Rs. Five Thousand only) as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony and Rs 3,500/- ( Rs. Three 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.
