Benji Masih complainant through the present complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, ‘the Act’) has prayed that the opposite parties be directed not to recover the amount of Rs.27650/- raised vide bill dated 20.4.2015 and same may be quashed. He has also claimed Rs.15,000/- as compensation for the mental agony, harassment and inconvenience and also as litigation expenses, all in the interest of justice.   

2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he has got an electric connection bearing A/c No.SF-79/1172L from the opposite parties and paying its electricity bills regularly without any default and as such he is the consumer of the opposite parties. It was stated that opposite parties served a bill dated 20.4.2015 amounting to Rs.27650/- to the complainant whereas his sanctioned load was 1 KW and his electricity bills comes to Rs.500 or 700. It was further stated that complainant is a poor labourer and reside in a single room in which only two electric bulbs are installed in his premises. Complainant never committed any theft of electricity. It is pertinent to mention here that an application was moved by the complainant to the opposite party no.4 for the rectification of the disputed bill. It was also stated that an employee of the opposite party inspected the spot and found that the seals of the meter was intact one but the opposite party is adamant not to rectify the bill, hence this complaint. It was next stated that complainant went to the office of opposite party and requested them to withdraw the illegal demand of Rs.27650/- but they flatly refused to admit the claim of the complainant and threatened him that they will disconnect his electricity supply which is clear cut deficiency in service on their part.
3. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared through their counsel and filed the written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the complainant has filed the false and frivolous complaint. Complainant has not come to the Court with clean hands and present complaint is not maintainable. On merits, it was admitted that complainant is the consumer of the opposite parties vide A/c No.SF-79/1172L. It was also admitted that opposite parties issued a bill dated 20.4.2015 to the complainant and demanded Rs.27650/- from him and the sanctioned load of the complainant was 1 KW. It was stated that the amount of Rs.27650/- was the energy charges of the complainant. It was further stated that the previous reading of the complainant was 4090 units and in the month of April 2015 the new reading was 7862 units, so the opposite party send the bill of 3772 units to the complainant and demanded the amount of Rs.27650/- as energy charges. It was also stated that the amount demanded by the opposite parties is legal and genuine and there is no deficiency in service on their part. All other averments made in the complaint have been denied and lastly the complaint has been prayed to be dismissed with costs.        

4. Complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith other documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C5 and closed the evidence. 
5. Sh.Ram Gopal S.D.O. has tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP-1 alongwith other documents Ex.OP-2 to Ex.OP-4 and closed the evidence.

6. We have duly considered the pleadings of both the parties and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsels for the purpose of adjudication of the present complaint.

7.       From the pleadings and evidence on record it is clear that the complainant is the holder of electricity connection bearing A/c No.SF-79/1172L and as such is a consumer of the opposite parties. The complainant has challenged the bill dated 20.4.2015 issued by the opposite parties asking him to pay Rs.27650/-. The complainant has contended that his sanctioned load was 1 KW. and his electricity bill comes to Rs.500 or 700. He has further contended that he is a poor labourer and resides in a single room where only two electric bulbs are installed and he has never committed any theft of electricity. To prove his version complainant has not produce on record any corroborative evidence from which all these facts can be cleared.

8.       On the other hand opposite parties have submitted that complainant is the consumer of the opposite parties and bill in question has rightly been issued to him. Opposite parties have further submitted that the previous reading of the complainant was 4090 units and in the month of April 2015 the new reading was 7862 units and the opposite parties send the bill of 3772 units to the complainant and demanded the above said amount of Rs.27650/- as energy charges which were consumed by him. To prove his version opposite parties have placed on record Ex.OP-4 from which it is clear that complainant has consumed the electricity upto 3772 units for which the bill in question was issued to him.

9.       From the entire above discussion it is proved that complainant has consumed the electricity and bill in question has rightly been issued to him by the opposite parties. We find no merit in this complaint and the same is hereby dismiss. No order as to costs.

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)

SEPT. 17, 2015                                                       Member.

*YP*