Punjab

Gurdaspur

CC/140/2019

Suman Babbar - Complainant(s)

Versus

P.S.P.C.Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.V.S.Chauhan Adv

13 May 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, GURDASPUR
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLEX , B BLOCK ,2nd Floor Room No. 328
 
Complaint Case No. CC/140/2019
( Date of Filing : 12 Apr 2019 )
 
1. Suman Babbar
aged about 65 years Wd/o Prem Lal R/o Ram Sharnam colony gurdaspur
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. P.S.P.C.Ltd
Te Mall Patiala through its Chairman
2. 2.P.S.P.C.Ltd
Circle gurdaspur through its S.E
3. 3. P.S.P.C.Ltd
city Sub Division gurdaspur through SDO
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Sh. Naveen Puri PRESIDENT
  Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu. MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Sh.V.S.Chauhan Adv, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 Sh.Suvir Mahajan, Adv., Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 13 May 2022
Final Order / Judgement

  Complainant Smt.Suman Babbar 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 illegal demand raised in the bill dated 30.10.2018, 13.1.2019 and 28.02.2019. Opposite parties be further directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as physical harassment and mental agony alongwith Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses to her.

2.        The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant received inflated electricity bill of her house dated 30.10.2018 amounting to Rs.43,310/- from opposite parties. It is placed at Ex.C-4, which is the basis of the complaint. It is alleged by complainant that the bill in dispute shows consumption of 5072 units which is illegal for the sanctioned load of 3.94 KW against electric connection No.3004700852. It is further alleged that subsequent bills dated 13.1.2019 and 28.2.2019, which are paced at Ex.C-5 and Ex.C-6 are also of the same nature. Complainant mentioned that her normal electricity bill amount is around Rs.2000/- to Rs.3000/-. Copies of bill are placed as evidence.

3.     Notices of this complaint were issued to opposite parties, who appeared through their counsel. Opposite parties denied all the allegations in their written reply and stated that bills are issued as per actual consumption of the complainant. It is also specifically mentioned by opposite party that as per Ex.OP-1 bill dated 2.9.2018 was issued to complainant for the consumption of 4276 units and amounting to Rs.38,390/- and the balance amount of the bill was carried forward in the subsequent bills and the amount in 01.3.2019 was Rs.42,010/-(Ex.OP-4) but reasons for high consumption  has not been explained. Opposite party also placed on record the details of meter reading at Ex.OP-5.

4.       Alongwith complaint, complainant has filed her own affidavit alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-6.

5.    Alongwith written reply, opposite parties filed affidavit of Sh.Hirdeypal Singh Bajwa SDO, PSPCL Sub Div. City Gurdaspur Ex.OP-1/A alongwith other documents Ex.OP1to Ex.OP-6.

6.        We have carefully gone through the pleadings of counsel for  both the parties and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsel for the complainant for the purposes of adjudication of the present complaint Complainant led evidence.

7.     As detailed above, complainant placed on record the electricity bills issued by opposite parties dated 30.10.2018 amounting to Rs.43310/-(Ex.C-4), dated 13.1.2019 amounting to Rs.40,150/- (Ex.C-5) and alleged that these are illegal and excessive. It is also alleged that bill dated 30.10.2018 is showing the reading of 5072 units which is completely illegal for load of 3.94 KW. It is prayed to withdraw the illegal demand raised through these bills. It is also pleaded by complainant that his electric consumption is very low to the range of Rs.2000/- to Rs.3,000/- and placed record the previous bill  as a  proof

8.       Opposite parties denied all the allegations in their written statement and stated that bill dated 1.9.2018 was issued for consumption of  4176 units  for an amount of Rs.38,390/-but copy of bill placed at Ex.OP-1 shows the date as 2.9.2018 and 4276 units  and amount unpaid is carried forwarded to the subsequent bills making the total of Rs.42010/- in bill dated 1.3.2019. Opposite party placed on record the copies of bills dated 2.9.2018, 30.10.2018, 14.1.2019 and 13.1.2019 at Ex.OP-1, Ex.OP-2, Ex.OP-3 and Ex.OP-4 but reasons for the high consumption has not been explained by opposite parties.

9.       Opposite parties also submitted the document Ex.OP-5 showing the meter reading details of the connection of the complainant from 11.7.2017 to 5.7.2019. The data in this document reveals that meter reading on 4.7.2018 was 994 units but next reading on 1.9.2018 is shown as 5270 units which means consumption of 4226 units within two months. The bill dated 30.10.2018 for 5072 units seems to be issued by opposite parties on this basis  copies of bills submitted by opposite parties do not match with copies of bills submitted by complainant whereas both are issued by opposite parties. This consumption of electricity for two months seems to be on very much higher side as per sanctioned load of the complainant. It is neither explained by opposite party nor any evidence is put on record to justify this. Further as per data in Ex.OP-5 meter status is shown as P code in 7/18 and 9/18 but defective in 1/19 under D code from this month.

10.      From the above facts and figures, we are of the considered view that working of meter appears to be erratic from 9/18 where the reading jumped to 5270 units from 994 units and this meter  is shown defective afterwards in  1/2019.  So the opposite parties must have acted upon as per guideline given in the Supply Code Regulation 21.5.2 to issue the bills to complainant for this unjustified consumption. But opposite parties fails to follow their own guidelines and the complainant is unnecessarily harassed by issuing the huge amount of electricity bill without any justification. Moreover opposite parties has not followed the Supply Code Regulation 30.1.2 by not issuing any separate notice to the complainant for  their under assessment. Hence it is the negligence and deficiency in service on part of opposite parties and bill in dispute issued by opposite parties is not justified.

11.     In view of the aforesaid discussion, circumstances and facts of the case the complaint is partly allowed and electricity bill in dispute dated 30.10.2018 amounting Rs.43,310/- is hereby set aside. Opposite party is further directed to refund the amount deposited by complainant against this disputed bill if any. No order as to costs.

12.        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.

 

 

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

          (Naveen Puri)

                                                                            President   

 

Announced:                                                (Bhagwan Singh Matharu)

May 13, 2022                                                       Member

*MK*

 
 
[ Sh. Naveen Puri]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu.]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.