Complainant Pritam Singh through the present complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, ‘the Act’) has prayed that the impugned demand of Rs.39,440/- raised vide bill dated 8.12.2015 may kindly be withdrawn and opposite parties are also restrained from recovering the amount of Rs.39,440/- from him. He has further claimed Rs.20,000/- as compensation along with interest at the rate of 18% Per Annum from the date of due till its actual realization including litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he had got electric meter bearing Account No.G-43NE-520389F (Old) and 3000189868 (New) in his house for domestic purpose and the connected load of the electric connection was 0.800 K.W. It was pleaded that complainant is hiring the services of the opposite parties and as such he is consumer of the opposite parties. It was pleaded that complainant was regularly paying the electricity charges to the opposite parties without any default and opposite parties removed the said electric meter of the complainant at their own which was installed outside his house and installed new meter in place of old meter. Old meter was under the lock and key of the opposite parties. It was further pleaded that the time of removing the electric meter opposite parties had not kept the same in Car Board and did not seal it in the presence of the complainant. It was pleaded that opposite parties did not take any consent for checking the said electric meter in the M.E. Lab. It was also pleaded that opposite parties have issued the impugned bill dated 8.12.2015 amounting to Rs.39,440/- to the complainant and on the perusal of the bill in question it was revealed that the said bill was issued as per average basis and the same had been issued for 749 days. It was next pleaded that on the contrary to it complainant had paid entire previous bills which was evident from the last bill amounting to Rs.4360/- dated 20.10.2015 which was paid by the complainant and as such the question of impugned demand of Rs.39,440/- does not arise at all. It was pleaded that the alleged demand of Rs.39,440/- raised vide bill dated 8.12.2015 was illegal, null & void. It was further pleaded that complainant had requested the opposite parties to admit his claim but they had refused to admit the same and threatened him that they will recover the above said amount illegally, forcibly and by using coercive methods which necessitated the complainant to file the instant complaint, hence this complaint.
- Notice of the complaint was served upon the opposite parties who appeared through their counsel and filed the written reply stating therein that mechanical meter was removed in the presence of the complainant for installing electronic meter with the consent of the complainant and the same was packed in the Card Board and consent memo was also prepared which was signed by the complainant and the concerned J.E. It was stated that bill was not issued to the complainant because of the error in SAP system. It was further stated that complainant had moved an application to the opposite parties on 15.10.2015 regarding wrong billing and as per the report of area incharge the bill of the complainant revised on 8.12.2015 for 749 days for Rs.39,440/- for 7338 units. All other averments made in complaint have been denied and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint with heavy costs.
4. Counsel for the complainant had tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C1 along with document Ex.C2 to Ex.C5 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.
5. Sh.Amardeep Singh Nagra A.E. S.D.O. had tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OPW1/A along with document Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-5 and closed the evidence on behalf of opposite parties.
6. From the pleadings and evidence on record it is clear that the complainant has obtained one electric connection bearing account no. G-43NE-520389F (Old) and 3000189868 (New) from the opposite parties and as such is a consumer of the opposite parties. The complainant has mainly challenged the demand of Rs.39,440/- being raised by opposite parties in the bill dated 8.12.2015 being illegal, null & void.
7. On the other hand opposite parties have contended that the amount claimed from the complainant was the actual consumption charges only as the bill could not be issued to the complainant due to error in SAP system. The bill of the complainant was revised on 8.12.2015 for 749 days for Rs.39,440/- for 7338 units and the same is legal and valid.
- From the entire above discussion we find that no doubt the amount claimed vide impugned bill is the charges for energy consumed by the complainant. But not sending regular bills to the complainant does amount to deficiency in service. By sending a bill for two years after overhauling account and making the consumer to pay the same in one go is deficiency in services for which complainant deserves to be compensated. In the light of this we are of this considered view that this complaint can be best disposed off by giving directions to the opposite parties for sending regular bills and further opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.5000/- to the complainant for causing harassment and mental agony within a period of 30 days from the receipt of copy of orders.
- 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)
JUNE, 14, 2016 Member.
*YP*
