Complainant Davinder Kumar 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  withdraw the impugned demand raised in the bill in question and to quash the bill and  to issue bill after making proper consumption. Opposite parties be further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for physical harassment and mental agony and litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.

2.        The case of the complainant in brief is that he has got installed an domestic electric connection bearing Account No.G 62 GF 432677 W and is using the electricity and has been paying the consumption bills regularly to the opposite parties, Hence, he is consumer. He is very poor person.  He is BPL Card holder and he has been given concession of 400 units per bill. His average bills are coming from Rs.100/- to Rs.150/-. He has further pleaded that opposite parties have issued a bill dated 23.6.2015 in which impugned demand of Rs.32,550/- has been raised. Actually the abovesaid bill is totally illegal, null and void and is not binding upon him as there is nothing outstanding against him towards the electricity charges. He approached the opposite party no.4 and requested them to withdraw the impugned demand raised in bill, but of no avail. 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 complainant was issued bill for the month of 12/2014 for 1099 units of electricity. Thereafter due to non availability of reading record, the complainant was issued bill for the month of 2/15 and 4/15 based on average. After that actual reading of the complainant was recorded in the month of 7/2015 and accordingly bill was issued to the complainant based on actual consumption after making adjustment of average bills mentioned above and hence a sum of Rs.32,250/- was worked out. Thus it was clear that complainant had not been charged anything else than consumption charges and hence complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint and complaint filed by the complainant was vexatious one and deserves to be dismissed with special cost. On merits also, the same pleadings have been repeated and dismissal of the complaint prayed

4.     Complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C1, alongwith other documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C4 and closed the evidence. 

5.       Counsel for the opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Inderjit Singh S.D.O. Ex.OP-1, alongwith other documents Ex.OP2 and Ex.OP3 and closed the evidence.

6.       We have carefully gone through the pleadings of both the parties; arguments advanced by their respective counsels and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsels for the purposes of adjudication of the present complaint.

7.       From the pleadings and evidence on record we find that complainant is the holder of one electric connection bearing account No.G 62 GF 432677 W  and as such is a consumer of the opposite party. The case of the complainant is that he is very poor person and is BPL Card holder and further has been given concession of 400 units per bill. The average bills of the complainant are coming from Rs.100/- to Rs.150/- only per bill. The complainant has challenged the bill dated 23.6.2015 in which demand of Rs.32,550/- was made by the opposite party. The complainant has argued that the said demand is excessive and is totally illegal.

 8.       On the other hand counsel for the opposite party has contended that the demand raised vide bill dated 23.6.2015 is legal and valid and is based on actual consumption charges only. It was submitted that complainant was issued bill for the month of 12/2014 for 1099 units of electricity. Thereafter due to non availability of reading record, the complainant was issued bill for the month of 2/15 and 4/15 based on average. After that actual reading of the complainant was recorded in the month of 7/2015 and accordingly bill was issued to the complainant based on actual consumption after making adjustment of average bills mentioned above and hence a sum of Rs.32,250/- was worked out.

9.      From the entire above discussion we find that opposite party has admitted that due to non-availability of reading record, the complainant was issued bill for the month of 2/15 and 4/15 based on average. Earlier also complainant was issued bill for the month of 12/2014 for 1099 units of electricity. Now after recording actual reading in 7/2015 after making adjustments of average bills mentioned above a sum of Rs.32,250/- was worked out. No plausible explanation was given by opposite party for not recording actual reading of the meter. It was the duty of the opposite party to record readings regularly and issue bills on actual consumption basis. Even the pleas taken by the opposite party in their written statement are non-speaking and vague. A consumer has every right to know what he is paying and why he is paying.

10.       Hence we are of this considered view that this complaint can be best disposed of by giving directions to the opposite party and as such we direct the opposite party to issue a detailed notice to the complainant within 15 days from the receipt of copy of orders explaining therein all the details of consumption and rules and instruction under which opposite party wants to recover the impugned amount from him. The opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.3,000/- to the complainant as compensation for the unnecessary harassment caused for sending average bills for non-availability of reading record for no fault on the part of complainant. Meanwhile the recovery of the remaining amount shall remain stayed. However the complainant shall remain bound to pay the subsequent bills as per actual consumption charges. Disposed off accordingly.

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

          (Naveen Puri)

                                                                             President   

Announced:                                                   (Jagdeep Kaur)

January,07 2016                                                   Member

*MK*