Complainant Balvinder Singh  has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (for short, C.P.Act.) seeking necessary directions to the opposite parties to quash and set aside bill dated 13.8.2015 for Rs.5200/- being illegal, null and void. Opposite parties be further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- for mentally and physically harassment alongwith Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses to him.

2.        The case of the complainant in brief is that he has installed an electric connection in his house for domestic purpose bearing Account No.G41BF270790L. He is using the electricity, paying the consumption bills regularly to the opposite parties and nothing is outstanding against him and as such he is consumer of the opposite parties.  His sanctioned load is 0.810 KW. The opposite parties had sent bill No.159 dated 13.08.2015 for Rs.5200/- for the period from 17.06.2015 to 13.08.2015 to him which is wrong and illegal.  He approached the opposite party no.4 for quashing the bill as the same was illegal and false, but of no use. He has further pleaded that earlier he deposited the electricity bills as per the units used by him. Moreover, he never received such type of huge amount prior to the receiving of impugned bill. He even requested the opposite parties for checking of meter on 14.08.2015 and opposite parties visited the site for checking of his electric meter installed in his house. On the same day the opposite parties has checked the meter and found that “the electric meter is defective and there is no display of consumed electric units on screen of meter”. Opposite parties told that this electric meter will be changed by new one and this eclectic meter will mechanically examined in Mechanical Laboratory at Gurdaspur. Opposite parties further told that the present bill will be cancelled and fresh average bill will be issued. On the direction of the opposite parties the meter replaced with new meter on 24.09.2015. On the same day, the old meter was sealed in his presence for mechanical checkup from Mechanical Laboratory Gurdaspur. Opposite parties had sent the Mechanical Checking report to him vide memo no.749 dated 04.08.2016. As per of M.E.Lab Gurdaspur report vide challan no.42 dated 28.07.2016, it is clarified that the display of meter was dead and meter was not burnt. However, opposite parties have charged Rs.520/- on account of burnt meter from him which is totally wrong. There is no any previous balance of the electricity connection. He requested the opposite parties to withdraw bill dated 13.08.2015 but they refused to do so. Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  Hence this complaint.

3.       Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite parties who appeared through their counsel and filed their written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable; the complainant has got no locus standi to file the present complaint and the complainant has filed a false, frivolous and vexatious complaint by concealing the true facts from this Hon’ble Forum. On merits, it was admitted that meter of the complainant was checked in M.E.Lab in the presence of the complainant and during the checking of the meter in M.E.Lab on 04.08.2016 it was found that display of the meter was dead and this fact was fully explained to the complainant by the opposite parties. The complainant was fully apprised that the bill in dispute pertains to consumption of 772 units and the same has been rightly issued, and accordingly the complainant paid the bill without any protest. However, after a lapse of long time, the complainant has filed the present complaint by setting up totally a false and frivolous story. So far as the amount of Rs.520/- is concerned, the same has been charged on account of replacement of meter which was replaced by MCO No.58311/015 dated 17.09.2015 and same was effected on 24.09.2015 by concerned J.E. The bill in dispute is legal, valid, genuine and as per the actual consumption made by the complainant and the complainant had already paid the same without any protest, as such at this belated state, the complainant has no locus standi to challenge the bill in dispute. All other averments made in the complaint have been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

4.     Complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.CW-1/A, alongwith other documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C10 and closed the evidence. 

5.       Sh.Surinder Singh S.D.O. PSPCL tendered into evidence his own affidavit OP1, alongwith other documents Ex.OP2 and Ex.OP-3 and closed the evidence.

6.      We have duly heard the learned counsels for both the sides in the back drop of the legally applicable merit of the supporting evidence/document(s) as produced by the litigating parties in order to statutorily resolve the inter-se dispute (in accordance with the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986) prompting the present complaint. We observe that the complainant had been quite a long time consumer of the opposite party service providers/ corporation being the valid beneficiary of the 0.810 KW DS Connection in the name of his since demised father Baja Singh (Affidavit Ex.Cw-1/A) with Electric Meter # G41BF270790L, at his family residence. He has filed the instant complaint for statutory redressal of his grievance caused on account of receipt of an excessive consumption Bill dated 13.08.2015 for Rs 5,200/- (Ex.C1) followed by successive threats of disconnection by the opposite party Corporation. The complainant reported the matter to the OP4 SDO about the defective Meter sans the reading display and he was further charged a sum of Rs 520/- as cost of Meter Replacement. The evidentiary affidavit along with the affidavit (Ex.Cw-1/A) and other documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C10 as produced by the complainant satisfactorily and sufficiently prove the complaint-raised allegations.

7.       However, upon appearance, the OP service providers have somehow, deposed (Affidavits Ex.OP1) implying thereby that the Meter had been defective with no reading display but the Bill was raised/ charged for the correct consumption i.e., for Rs.5,200/-. We are certainly not convinced as to how the Meter with defective display was read out for the correct consumption and subsequent billing etc.

8.       We are of the considered opinion that the opposite party service providers/corporation have acted in an arbitrary and unauthorized illegal manner in the present case and thus the present complainant shall not be liable to pay the same as his actual consumption. Somehow, we find that the impugned demands as put forth upon the complainant for payment of the levied charges by the opposite party corporation has not been a matter of routine and also not in accordance with the legally accrued amounts as per their own Sales & Distribution of Electricity Rules & Regulations and the details were neither detailed out in the impugned Bill nor any pre-notice was served, as requisite.

9.       In the light of the all above, we partly allow the present complaint and ORDER the opposite party # 4 (the SDO) to recall and set-aside the impugned Bill besides to pay him Rs.3,000/- as cost and compensation (for the harassment and financial expense caused by the instant forced upon litigation) within a period of 30 days of the receipt of the copy of these orders otherwise the awarded amount shall attract interest @ 9% PA from the date of the orders till actually paid. In the meantime, the complainant shall however remain liable to pay all his current and future consumption charges for his actual consumption on regular basis. 

10.      Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record. 

           (Naveen Puri)

                                                                           President   

Announced:                                                  (Jagdeep Kaur)

March,16 2018                                                       Member

*MK*