DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATIALA. Complaint No. CC/010/169 of 9.3.2010 Decided on: 26.8.2010 Kuljeet Singh S/o Lachman Singh resident of H.No.124 Gurdev Enclave Sanouri Adda, Patiala. -----------Complainant Versus 1. Punjab State Electricity Board ,Patiala, The Mall, Patiala through its Secretary. 2. S.D.O.,P.S.E.B. Sub Division, East, Patiala. ----------Opposite parties. Complaint under Sections 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act. QUORUM Sh.Inderjit Singh, President Sh.Amarjit Singh Dhindsa,Member Smt.Neelam Gupta, Member Present: For the complainant: Sh. Sh.B.S.Josan, Advocate For opposite parties: Sh. P.S.Walia, Advocate ORDER SH.INDERJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT Complainant Kuljeet Singh has brought this consumer complaint under Sections 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 as amended up to date ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the opposite parties fully detailed and described in the head note of the complaint. 2. As per averments made in the complaint the case of the complainant is like this:- That the complainant is holding an electricity connection bearing account No.P-23-RM-3500359 X in his name. That the demand so raised by the opposite parties on account of sundry charges amounting to Rs.28334/- from the complainant is illegal, null and void, without any basis and criteria. That no amount of any kind is due against the complainant and the complainant has been regularly depositing the electricity bills with the opposite parties but the opposite parties illegally threatened the complainant to disconnect the electric meter connection. That the electricity meter of the complainant was never checked by any inspecting staff, nor the complainant ever used the electricity unauthorizedly, as such the demand is illegal, null and void and the same is liable to be dismissed. That the complainant approached the opposite parties to quash the demand so issued/raised by the opposite parties, but the opposite parties did not pay any heed to the genuine request of the complainant. The opposite parties failed to give any detail of the said amount to the complainant. That due to the above said illegal act of the opposite parties the complainant has suffered mentally and physically and as such the complainant is entitled to damages to the tune of Rs.50000/- from the opposite parties. Hence this complaint. 3. Notice of the complaint was given to the opposite parties, who appeared and filed a joint written reply contesting the claim of the complainant. It is admitted that complainant is holding electric connection account No.P-23RM-3500359. It is denied that the demand raised is illegal, null and void, without any basis and criteria. The facts are that the premises of the complainant were checked on 2.9.2008 by R.P.Singh J.E.alongwith Onkar Chand J.E. East Sub Division P.S.E.B.,Patiala and the consumer was found running the business of dairy farm and had five servants working there and as such electric connection was changed into N.R.S. and he was thus to be charged as per N.R.S.Tariff. The checking report was duly prepared at the spot which was signed by the representative of the consumer who was working there in token of its correctness. There after he was used to be charged as per N.R.S. tariff and he has been paying the same accordingly. The checking was done in the presence of the representative of the consumer who remained present through out the checking at the site. The copy of the same was also given to him at the spot. That he has been paying the bills regularly before the checking as per D.S.tariff.However it was detected by the audit party that the consumer was liable to be charged as per N.R.S.tariff for the last six bi monthly bills prior to the date of checking as per rules and regulations of the Board as per Punjab Govt.Notification July 2007.Thus he has been charged accordingly. The demand is legal and as per rules of the Board. The consumer was duly made to understand the details and the reason for making the demand but he failed to understand and filed this false frivolous complaint. The complainant is not entitled to any damages whatsoever as there is no illegal act on the part of opposite parties. All other averments made in the complaint have also been denied and have prayed that complaint be dismissed. 4. The parties in order to prove their case have tendered their respective evidence on the record. 5. The parties have filed the written arguments. We have gone through the same and have also heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6. The case of opposite parties is that the premises of the complainant were checked on 2.9.2008 by R.P.Singh J.E.alongwith Onkar Chand J.E. and the consumer was found running the business of dairy farm and five servants were working there. The electric connection was changed into N.R.S. tariff as per rules. The checking report was duly prepared at the spot which was signed by the representative of the consumer in token of its correctness. The consumer has been paying the subsequent bills accordingly. 7. The complainant has challenged the bill, Ex.C4 dated 22.1.2010 wherein an amount of Rs.28334/- has been charged as sundry charges. 8. We have considered the rival contentions of the parties. 9. The perusal of the bill, Ex.C4 dated 22.1.2010 would show that it contains an amount of Rs.28334/- as sundry charges. The perusal of the bill, Ex.C4 would further show that the details of the amounts mentioned as sundry charges have not been given. The opposite parties have alleged some checking of the premises of the complainant dated 2.9.2008 by Sh.R.P.Singh, JE and others. However, the opposite parties have not placed the alleged checking report on the record nor the details of the amount mentioned as sundry charges in the disputed bill, Ex.C4 have been mentioned by the opposite parties. 10. In view of the foregoing discussions we are clearly of the view that the opposite parties have failed to establish their case. 11. As a result we hold the demand to be unjustified amounting to deficiency of service and quash the same with no order as to costs. The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record. Pronounced. Dated:26.8.2010. President Member Member
| | Mr. Amarjit Singh Dhindsa, Member | HONABLE MR. Inderjit Singh, PRESIDENT | Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member | | 
