Complainant Samual Masih 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 exclude amount of Rs.25,461/- and Rs.8757/- from the bill in dispute and to recover the actual consumption amount from him. Opposite parties be further directed to restore the electric connection till the final decision of the complaint. Opposite parties be next directed to pay Rs.20,000/- for mental agony, physical torture and financial loss caused by the opposite parties to him due to deficient service and unfair trade practice alongwith Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.

2.        The case of the complainant in brief is that he got installed an electric connection  bearing A/C No.G 43 NF 551564M in his name and has been paying all the electricity bills without any default and  nothing is outstanding against him and as such he is consumer of the opposite parties. He is a poor labourer and having very small house. He has installed 3 LED bulbs and two Fans in his house. His average bimonthly bill was about Rs.250/- to Rs.300/-. He has further alleged that in the month of April/May 2017 the opposite parties replaced his old meter. In the month of June 2017, the opposite parties issued highly inflated bill for Rs.3300/- out of which he paid Rs.2000/- as the opposite party no.1 assured to rectify his bill. The  opposite parties issued a bill dated 23.8.2017 to him for Rs.33,350/- in which the opposite parties have slapped Rs.23,138/- as arrears of current financial year and Rs.8522/- as CC without mentioning any reasons thereto, that on what account this huge amount has been slapped on him but he never used electricity energy to such extent. He has further pleaded that on receipt of the illegal bill in question, he approached the opposite party  no.1 and requested him to rectify the bill and to exclude the amount of Rs.23,138/- and Rs.8522/- from the bill and to receive the actual consumption amount. He has further alleged that to his utter surprise, the opposite parties again issued bill dated 25.10.2017 for Rs.35,320/- in which the opposite parties slapped Rs.25,461/- as arrears of current financial year and Rs.8757/- as CC instead of rectification of  his previous bill. Thereafter he again approached the opposite party and requested to rectify his bill and to receive the actual consumption charges but all in vain. Thus the demand of the opposite parties without any checking and notice is illegal against the rules, cryptic, arbitrary, without any basis and liable to be withdrawn and not binding upon him. 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 taking the preliminary objection that the complaint is not maintainable and the complainant is not come to the Commission with clean hands and concealed the true facts from this Hon’ble Commission. On merits, it was submitted that old meter of complainant was changed with his consent and meter was sent to ME Lab with the consent of complainant. In the ME Lab the consumption of electricity shown in the meter was upto 6420 K.W.H. Units. The bill of the month of May.2017 was issued as per consumption of electricity energy by the complainant of amounting to Rs.35,229/-.In which current cycle change Rs.29,823/- were added as per advice of ME Lab.  It was further submitted that bill dated 23.8.2017 amounting to Rs.33,350/- was issued to the complainant in which amount of Rs.23,138/- as arrears of current financial year as well as Rs.1307/- were added as current cycle charges. The complainant did not pay the previous bills and arrears which were added in the disputed bill. The bill dated 23.8.2017 is legal, genuine and as per actual consumption of electricity and the complainant is bound to pay the same.  The bill dated 25.10.2017 is genuine and legal, complainant is bound to pay the same. The arrears of the previous bill were added in the bill dated 25.10.2017.  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.CW-1 alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-7 and closed the evidence.

5.      Ld. counsel for the opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Hirdey Pal Singh Bajwa Ex.OP-1, alongwith  copies of documents Ex.OP-2  to Ex.OP-10 and closed the evidence.

6.        We have carefully gone through the pleadings of counsels for the parties and 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.        The complainant Samual Masih is a consumer of PSPCL and using electricity through electric connection  bearing A/C No.G 43 NF 551564M and paying bills regularly till the issue of disputed bill dated 5/2017.

8.       On pursuing of the record submitted by opposite party it is evident that the charges levied in the electricity bill issued on 22.8.2017 are not justified.  Ex.OP-10 gives credence to the working of meter and charges levied thereon. The electric connection/meter and the bills generated thereof was showing ‘F’ Code. As per ‘NOTE” column as Ex.OP-10 Code ‘F’ as per PSPCL instructions implies that meter reading has been taken for some other meter and not the one corresponding to the said electric connection. Hence, the previous readings and current reading taken into account by M.E.Lab. report vide Ex.OP-9 is not correct and hence cannot be relied upon for levying the charges of Rs.29,823/-.

9.        In view of the aforesaid discussion, facts and circumstances of the case, the complaint is partly allowed and the sundry charges levied vide disputed bill of 23.8.2017 are ordered to be quashed  from the aforesaid bill alongwith penalty levied thereon for delayed payment in prospective bills. Opposite party no.1 is further directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as harassment and inconvenience and Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. Opposite party no.1 is further directed to overhaul the account of the complainant and return the amount of Rs.29,823/- alongwith penalties collected thereon by adjusting the same in the next billing cycle. However, actual consumption charges after the replacement of the meter 4.7.2017 are to be levied as per actual by opposite party no.1/PSPCL and complainant is to comply with the said bills so raised by PSPCL/opposite party no.1.

10.            The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.

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

            (Naveen Puri)

                                                                            President   

Announced:                                                   (R.S.Sukhija)

April 28, 2022                                                     Member

*MK*