Haryana

StateCommission

A/239/2016

UHBVNL - Complainant(s)

Versus

PALA RAM - Opp.Party(s)

ALKA JOSHI

08 Apr 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :     239 of 2016

Date of Institution:     18.03.2016

Date of Decision :      08.04.2016

 

1.      Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, through its Secretary, Shakti Bhawan, Sector-6, Panchkula.

 

2.      The Sub Divisional Officer, Division No.1, Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, Kaithal.  

 

3.      The Executive Engineer, Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, Kaithal.

                                      Appellants/Opposite Parties

Versus

 

Pala Ram s/o Shri Radhey, Resident of Manas, Tehsil and District Kaithal.

                                      Respondent/Complainant

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                                                                                                         

Present:             Ms. Alka Joshi, Advocate for appellants.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

B.M. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

This appeal has been preferred against the order dated January 21^st, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kaithal (for short ‘the District Forum’) in Complaint No.65 of 2015.

2.      Pala Ram-complainant/respondent obtained domestic electric connection, from Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (for short ‘UHBVNL’)-Opposite Parties, bearing account No.KU-16/4294N. He had been paying the bills regularly. He received bill dated 25.06.2013 of Rs.35,897/- for 5136 units. He applied for meter testing. Report was given by the UHBVNL that the complainant was using electric energy for 2 fans, 4 tubes, one T.V. and the meter was O.K. The average consumption was 70-80 units except at one time when it was 89 units. The complainant filed complaint before the District Forum. The District Forum directed the UHBVNL to overhaul the account of the complainant by taking the average of meter-reading of succeeding six months from the date of disputed bill, that is, 25.06.2013.

3.      Having perused the case file, this Commission is of the view that the District Forum has certainly protected the interest of the appellants as well as consumer. Thus, no case for interference is made out.

4.      Finding no merit, the appeal is dismissed.

5.      The statutory amount of Rs.550/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the complainant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

Announced: 08.04.2016

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

 

CL