Complainant Tarlok 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 to refund the amount of Rs.15,080/- in his favour, which he has deposited under compulsion. Opposite parties be also directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of mental harassment suffered by him alongwith Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that originally Surinder Mohan Sharma son of Jagmohal Lal, resident of Jhulna Mahal, Gurdaspur was owner of the house in which the electric connection bearing Account No.3000127325 was installed by him. Surinder Mohan Sharma has sold the house as well as electric connection in dispute to the complainant vide registered Sale Deed dated 13.8.1992 and after that he is using the electricity and paying the electricity charges regularly to the opposite party without any default. Thus he is consumer of the opposite parties being beneficiary. He has further pleaded that opposite parties has issued a false and bogus bill dated 15.7.2014 for Rs.13,620/- which is illegal, null and void. On the bare perusal of the said bill, it revealed that the old meter reading of the electric meter is 1500 and the new was also same i.e. 1500. He went to the office of the opposite party no.4 and made representation dated 18.7.2014 and opposite party no.4 assured to him that they will rectify the impugned bill after necessary correction and asked for wait for some period. He has next pleaded that again opposite parties have issued bill dated 30.7.2014 to him for Rs.15,080/- in the said bill, the old reading of the meter was shown to be 3210 and new as 3726. This bill is also wholly illegal, null and void. Due to the illegal act and conduct of the opposite parties he has suffered great mental agony and also suffered mental as well as physical harassment from the hands 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 the present complaint is not maintainable as a case of un authorized use of electricity energy. On merits, it was submitted that the electric connection bearing account No.3000127325 was sanctioned in the name of Surinder Mohan. Actually, the meter of the complainant was checked on the written request of the complainant on 30.07.2014. The Area J.E. recorded the report regarding defective meter and due to the defective meter, the bill of the complainant from 28.5.2014 to 30.7.2014 were prepared on ‘D’ Code and the average consumption of 516 units was charged. The payment of the bill was made by the complainant on 1.8.2014 fully satisfied without any protest. Thereafter, the opposite party changed the electric meter of the complainant on 7.9.2014 and installed the new meter. In City Gurdaspur the opposite parties have issued bills from 1.4.2012 under Sap system and if the electric meter did not show the actual consumption, even though the system prepared the bill on average basis and advanced the reading by adding the average consumption. The meter of the complainant has also become defective on the reading of 1500, but the system issued the bills to the complainant by adding the average consumption and the reading of the complainant has now become upto 4045. The sanctioned load of the complainant is 3.410 kilowatt. The bills of the complainant were issued by the opposite parties on average basis as per the electricity supply code and Related matters Regulation 2007 of Clause 21.4 and 21.5. The amount demanded by the opposite parties is legal and genuine. 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.C11 and closed the evidence.
- Sh.Harmanpreet Singh Gil 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 Ex.OP-3 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’s assertion that the complainant has not been a ‘consumer’ gets negated since it stands proved on record vide the Sale Deed Ex.C11 that the complainant has been the ‘owner’ of the House (including the Electric Connection) through purchase transfer since 13.08.1992 and thus a ‘consumer’ under the Act. Further, the Bill dated 12.12.2014 clearly shows the amount payable as ‘ZERO’ and a credit balance of Rs.3,414/- in the complainant’s favour. It is not understood nor attempted to be explained by the OP as to how the Meter reading (Ex.C10) was shown as: 1500 (same as that on 24.02.2012) in the Bill dated 15.07.2014 and subsequently another Bill dated 30.07.2014 (Ex.C6) for Rs.15,080/- could be drawn in the account. Even, the OP’s produced details (Ex.OP2) fail to explain the ‘ambiguity’ and the ‘figure’ pertaining to 15.07.2014 has been conspicuously omitted. We find that the OP service providers have failed to prove their pleadings/claim satisfactorily through some cogent evidence on record and are thus found guilty of ‘deficiency in service’ under the Act.
8. In the light of the all above, we partly allow the present complaint and thus ORDER the titled opposite parties to withdraw the impugned Bill dated 30.07.2014 for Rs.15,080/- and refund the related amount deposited (if any) to the complainant within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of these orders besides to pay him Rs.3,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as cost of litigation otherwise the entire awarded amount shall attract interest @ 9% PA from the date of orders till actually paid.
9. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record.
(Naveen Puri)
President.
ANNOUNCED: (Jagdeep Kaur)
August 13, 2015 Member.
*MK*
