Complainant Jaswant 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 rectify the bills and to recover the actual consumption from him. Opposite parties be further directed to restrain from disconnecting his electric connection, till the final decision of the complaint and Rs.20,000/- be awarded as compensation for mental agony, physical torture and financial loss caused by the opposite parties to him due to deficient service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he has got installed an electric connection in his house bearing Account No.G 65PN330496W in his name and has been using the electricity energy and is continuously paying the electricity charges to the opposite parties without any default and as such he is consumer of the opposite parties. His existing sanctioned load is 1 KW and status of his meter is also “O” and his bimonthly consumption is about Rs.500/- to Rs.600/-. He has further pleaded that opposite parties has issued a bill dated 21.10.2014 to him for Rs.1,03,420/- in which total consumption made by him is shown as 22520 units as new and 8680 units as old which is totally wrong, exaggerated, arbitrary, much more than the actual consumption made by him. He never used the electricity energy to this extent, nor he is in a position to pay such like huge amount and he was not in arrears. He has next pleaded that on receipt of the illegal bill he approached the opposite party no.1 and requested him to rectify the same and to explain reasons for showing such like exaggerated consumption. He also deposited Rs.120/- as fee of rectification of bill as per directions of opposite party no.1 but the opposite party put the matter pending with one pretext or the other and ultimately they refused to admit his claim and started threatening to disconnect his electricity supply in the event of non payment of the impugned demand. So, the demand of the opposite parties without any checking, against the rules, not binding upon him and liable to be withdrawn. Thus, there is clear cut 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 present dispute pertains to suppression of true reading of meter and causing wrongful gain to himself by complainant and causing wrongful loss to opposite parties and as such Hon’ble Forum has got no jurisdiction to try and entertain present complaint; the complainant has concealed material facts from Hon’ble Forum and has not come to the Forum with clean hands and as such present complaint is liable to dismissal on this score only. On merits, it was submitted that complainant is consumer of the opposite parties and is consuming electricity in his house through electric connection bearing Account No.G 65 PN 330496W. Opposite parties sent bill dated 21.10.2010 to the complainant for payment of Rs.1,03,420/-. It is absolutely incorrect to allege that consumption of units shown in said bill was not correct and is allegedly wrong, exaggerated, arbitrary, much more than the actual consumption of the complainant. It was also submitted that when the complainant approached the opposite party no.1 in connection of bill in question and sought clarification regarding said bill it was told to him that he has been suppressing meter reading in connivance with meter reader namely Ramesh Chander for almost sixteen months and has caused huge financial loss to opposite parties and financial gain to himself and as such is liable to make loss good by paying the amount of bill in question. From the perusal of data pertaining to consumption of complainant since January 2012 to September 2014 it becomes crystal clear that earlier bimonthly consumption of complainant in 6 months of 2012 was around 600 units and then it came down drastically which clearly shows that complainant has been suppressing meter reading by adopting illegal methods in connivance with meter reader. It was also submitted that said meter reader namely Ramesh Chander is under suspension and departmental proceedings are also pending against him. It was admitted that complainant deposited Rs.120/- but it was not correct that same was deposited on the directions of the opposite party no.1. Complainant has got published false news item in news paper based on false facts just to put pressure on employees of PSPCL that they accede to illegal demand of complainant. Complainant has made himself liable for criminal action also by committing illegal acts. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.
4. Complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C1, alongwith other documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C11 and closed the evidence.
5. Sh.Sanjiv Saini, S.D.O.PSPCL tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP-1, alongwith other documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP14 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. We observe that the OP service providers have admittedly raised/ issued the impugned consumption Bill dated 21.10.2014 for Rs.1,03,420/- for 22520 units of electricity consumed during the previous period and that includes the power consumption illegally consumed in connivance with the Meter Reader Ramesh Chander who used to record ‘incorrect’ but ‘lesser’ meter readings to escape the correct ‘billing’ etc. This vividly speaks of the sad state of affairs governing the raising and issuance of the consumption Bills upon the consumers and the callous attitude of the OP officials towards its customers. The Exhibits Ex.C1 to Ex.C11 further corroborates the revealed deficiency in service on the part of the OP service providers. The rebuttal defense in which the OP have opted ‘refuge’ is still the more amusing. As per the defense put forth by the OP corporation its employee Ramesh Chander, the Meter Reader connived with the complainant and noted/recorded the much lesser Meter readings only, thus ‘ignoring’ the correct readings to ‘benefit’ the consumer complainant. However, the list of ‘incorrect’ readings noted down by Ramesh Chander as per the Ex.OP9 does not include the A/c # G 65 PN 3300496W of the complainant. Somehow, the OP even at the asking of the follow-up legal action taken up/initiated against the perpetuators of the alleged crime ‘fraud’ could not produce any satisfactory proof of the same. The only documents it could produce were the copies of the mere ‘show cause’ explanatory letters/reminders issued to the employee much later in point of time than the time of ‘revelation’ of the crime committed, itself; as per the OP’s own claims etc. However, it has been the prerogative of the OP corporation as to how to deal with the alleged crime (fraud) committed against it but for certain the OP cannot legally manage to extract money from its ‘consumers’ in the name of the alleged crime having been committed and that too in connivance with its own employees.
8. In the light of the all above, we partly allow the present complaint and thus ORDER the titled opposite parties to withdraw the Electricity Bill dated 21.10.2014 setting it aside and also to refund the sundry deposits made, if any, by the complainant besides to pay Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of these orders otherwise the awarded amount shall attract interest @ 9% PA from the date of these orders till actually paid.
9. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to records.
(Naveen Puri)
President
ANNOUNCED: (Jagdeep Kaur)
May, 08 2015. Member
*MK*