Complainant Raghunath Singh through the present complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, ‘the Act’) has sought issuance of necessary directions to the titled opposite parties not to recover Rs.20,010/- shown in bill in dispute and not to disconnect his electric supply. Opposite parties be also directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony alongwith litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he has installed meter for his poultry farm bearing account No.G41 BF 321954F and is the consumer of the opposite parties. He is running this business for his livelihood and self employment. This business is the only source of income. Earlier complaint filed by him was withdrawn due to technical error. He has further pleaded that he has applied new connection for his poultry farm and after completion of all the formalities and depositing required fee etc. by him, opposite party no.4 had installed the abovesaid connection in his premises. At the time of installing the abovesaid electricity connection, he has purchased two bundle (200 mts)PVC wire from his own pocket in the month of October 2013. After that he has regularly paid the electricity bills to the opposite parties without any default. But surprisingly he received bill dated 28.3.2015 for Rs.20,010/- from the opposite party. After that he approached the opposite party no.4 and enquired the matter and he came to know from the opposite party that the amount charged from him is charges of PVC wire including consumption of units. He has requested the opposite party that he had already paid the expenses of PVC wire from his own pocket at the time of installing the new connection and submitted the receipts of bills of purchasing the PVC wire, but the opposite party has refused to accept his genuine request and is adamant upon their illegal act and conduct. He has moved an application dated 30.3.2015 but the opposite party no.4 flatly refused to admit his genuine request and threatened him that if he will not pay the said amount, then opposite party will disconnect the electricity supply. This act of the opposite party is illegal, null, void and against the rules and regulations of the corporation which proves clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.
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 with the intention to harass the opposite parties; the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands and concealed the material facts intentionally and deliberately and the present complaint is not maintainable as the complainant does not fall under the purview of Consumer Protection Act being NRS connection. On merits, it was submitted that the electric connection bearing account No.BF321954 was sanctioned in the name of complainant. It was incorrect that the complainant was running a small poultry farm and it was only source of his livelihood and for self employment. Infact the complainant deliberately concealed the material facts with the intention to take the undue advantage of process of law. Moreover, a single person cannot run a poultry farm. Actually, the opposite party has installed an electric connection in the premises of the complainant and laid the electric wire for the connection in dispute, which was provided by the department of the opposite party. The photocopy of the bill for the purchase of PVC wire filed with the complaint is totally a false and bogus document as it is neither on the proper printed bill nor stamped properly and no VAT is paid on the aboesaid bill. Moreover the wire laid by the opposite party for the connection in dispute is properly stamped with the mark of PSPCL which cannot be sold by any private seller/person. It was worth mentioned here that Vijay Electrical Store, Behrampur cannot sold any electric PVC wire as he is not the authorised dealer. The difference between the PVC wire which was purchased from the private seller is not stamped with mark of PSPCL whereas the PVC wire supplied by the department is properly stamped with the mark of PSPCL. The PVC wire installed by the department for the connection in dispute can be seen at any time as it is properly stamped with the mark of PSPCL, so the amount demanded by the opposite party is legal and genuine. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. It was also submitted that the amount demanded by the opposite party vide bill dated 28.3.2015 of Rs.20,010/- was the cost of the PVC wire which was installed by the department for providing the connection in dispute. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.
- Complainant has tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C1, along with other documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C7 and closed the evidence.
- Sh.Subash Chander S.D.O. of the opposite parties has tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP-1 along with other document Ex.OP-2 and closed the evidence.
6. We have duly considered the pleadings of both the parties; heard the arguments advanced by their counsels 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. We observe that the OP Corporation as per its circularized Rules & Regulations is within its legal right to recover its outstanding Capital expenses (pertaining to release of Power Connection) from the complainant but by providing complete details of all such expenses along with the probable reason of deferment etc and not by simply adding the outstanding same in the consumption Bill, as has been done in the present case; (Ex.C4 of 28.03.2015). The OP Corporation has now provided ample requisite details in the document Ex.OP2, as produced during the proceedings of the complaint; whereas the Bill (Ex.C2) for the PVC Wire as produced by the complainant lacks authenticity of usage since the wire used bears the PSPCL stamping over it and as such it should have not been available in the market. Hence, we find the impugned demand as fair and justified though not presented in the desired manner to the complainant.
8. In the light of the all above, we are of the considered opinion that the present complaint shall be best disposed of by issuing the necessary directive to the titled opposite parties to re-draw the impugned Bill for capital expenses outstanding in the desired manner (by supplying its full details etc) to the complainant besides to pay him a rebate of Rs.2,000/- as cost of litigation within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of these orders otherwise the complainant shall not be liable to pay the long delayed/ deferred outstanding (deferred for un-explained reasons).
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)
August 19, 2015 Member.
*MK*
