DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATIALA. Complaint No. CC/010/167 of 8.3.2010 Decided on: 13.9.2010 Labh Singh S/o Sh.Barkha Singh R/o Waraich Colony, Samana, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala. -----------Complainant Versus 1. P.S.E.B., H/O The Mall Road, Patiala through its Secretary. 2. S.D.O. Sub Division Urban, P.S.E.B. Samana, District 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. S.K.Garg, Advocate For opposite parties: Sh. Pawan Puri, Advocate ORDER SH.INDERJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT Complainant Labh 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 has been using the electricity through the connection ( 24 hours supply line) vide account No.P65SP650230A and meter No.776014 at agricultural land of the complainant, situated at village Sehajpura Khurd, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala. That the opposite parties with malafide intention and with the view of habitually harassing the complainant has issued the bill No.21697 dated 30.1.2010 of Rs.1,04,810/- which is totally wrong and illegal. That the passbook shows that the actual consumption is of 57 units only and the new reading has been taken on 9.1.2010, which is of 655 units. The employee of P.S.E.B. has made these entries in the passbook of the complainant and signed the same. That as the passbook of the complainant clearly shows that the bill dated 30.1.2010 is wrongly, arbitrarily and illegally calculated with no justification on the demand of such heavy amount i.e. of Rs.1,04,810/-.That the complainant has filed a complaint No.73 of 22.1.2009 decided on 1.12.2009 in the month of January 2009 against the opposite parties, in which the opposite parties have charged the complainant with an amount of Rs.82,972/- wrongly and illegally. The said complaint was allowed by this Forum and the illegal demand of Rs.82972/- by the opposite parties has been quashed by the Forum. That another complaint between the complainant and the opposite parties is still pending in this Court. In the month of November 2009 the opposite parties have charged the complainant with an amount of Rs.1,10,540/- wrongly and illegally. The Forum has granted stay in favour of the complainant and restrained the opposite parties from disconnecting the electricity meter of the complainant. That the demand of alleged amount is illegal, unwarranted and without any jurisdiction. That all the above mentioned facts clearly established that the opposite parties have acted in deficient and negligent manner and thus there is a clear cut deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and the opposite parties are indulging in unfair trade practices for which they are fully liable. That due to the deficiency in the service of the opposite p arties, the complainant has suffered a lot on account of mental and physical agony and harassment. The opposite parties again and again harassing the complainant from time to time. 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 the complainant is a registered consumer of the Board of the connection in dispute. That the connection of the complainant was checked by the checking officers of the Board and it was detected by the checking team that the consumer was committing theft of electricity energy. The concerned office of the Board had raised a demand of Rs.82972/- as penalty for committing theft of energy. This Forum while admitting the complaint of the complainant had directed the complainant to deposit 50% of the amount for which demand has been raised by the Board in the concerned office of the Board. The complainant had deposited the same in the concerned office of the Board on 28.4.2009.Thereafter, the complainant had challenged the meter on 18.8.2009 on the ground that the same is moving fast. The concerned office of the Board had immediately ordered to change the same and the removed meter was duly packed in a card board box. The complainant was issued a notice vide memo no.2881 dated 16.11.2009 vide which the complainant was directed to attend the M.E.Lab meter checking proceedings on 17.11.2009 but the complainant refused to accept the said notice. Even the complainant failed to attend the M.E.Lab on 17.11.2009 as was informed to the consumer. The meter was duly checked in the M.E.Lab and the M.E.Lab as per date and time given by the concerned office of the Board and after checking the meter had declared the same as O.K. So there was no defect in the meter. The concerned office of the Board is fully entitled to charge the consumer as per actual consumption shown by the meter. It is an admitted fact that the earlier complaint of the complainant relating to committing of theft of energy by the complainant has been allowed by this Forum on technical grounds. The concerned office of the Board undertakes to give the adjustment of the amount which was deposited by the complainant to the extant of 50% out of the total amount of theft of electricity. The concerned office of the Board is fully competent to charge the consumer as per actual consumption shown by the meter for which energy bills have been issued to the complainant. However, the amount deposited by the consumer i.e. 50% out of the amount of penalty shall be adjusted in the accounts of the consumer. There is no malafide against the complainant. It is denied that any officer or officials of the Board has any malafide intention or intends to harass the complainant. The Board is charging the amount as per actual reading shown by the meter. The charging of the amount as per reading shown by the meter of a consumer is the right of the Board. The meter is installed in the premises of the consumer and he can himself check his reading. The first reading of the new meter was recorded on 10.11.2009 in which the consumption was shown as 532-15=517 units. The electricity bills are used to be issued by the Board on bimonthly bills. The complainant has filed a complaint on the same cause of action which is pending before this Forum. So far as the bill amount is concerned, it is submitted that the Board has merely charged the amount of Rs.82972/- and the remaining amount is the actual consumption charges of the bill along with surcharge due to non depositing of the earlier bill. There is no illegality in noting the reading of the meter by the meter reader or in issuing the energy bills. The bills have been issued to the complainant as per consumption recorded by the meter. The demand as has been raised by the Board is absolutely legal and there is no illegality in raising the same. 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 complainant is that the opposite parties with malafide intention and with the view of harassing him have issued the bill,Ex.C3 dated 30.1.2010 of Rs.1,04,810/- which is wrong and illegal. It is also the case of the complainant that the pass book,Ex.C4 shows that the actual consumption is of 57 units only and the new reading has been taken on 9.1.2010 which is of 655 units. It is also the case of the complainant that he had filed a complaint No.73 of 22.1.2009 against the opposite parties which was decided on 1.12.2009 vide order,Ex.C6 in which the opposite parties had charged the complainant with an amount of Rs.82972/- wrongly and illegally. In the said complaint the demand of Rs.82972/- has been quashed. It is also the case of the complainant that another complaint No.CC/09/997 of 7.12.2009 has also been decided in his favour vide order dated 16.7.2010 in which the illegal amount of Rs.1,01,540/- in bill dated 28.11.2009 has been quashed. The demand of alleged amount is illegal, unwarranted and without any jurisdiction. 7. Whereas the case of opposite parties is that the complainant had challenged the meter on 18.8.2009 on the ground that the same is moving fast. The concerned office of the Board had immediately ordered to change the same vide meter change order,Ex.R2 dated 18.8.2009 effected on 17.9.2009 and the removed meter was duly packed in a card board box. The complainant was issued a notice vide memo,Ex.R3 dated 16.11.2009 vide which he was directed to attend the M.E.Lab meter checking proceedings on 17.11.2009, but the complainant refused to accept the said notice. Even he failed to attend the M.E.lab on 17.11.2009 as was informed. The meter was duly checked in the M.E.lab and after checking the meter had declared the same as O.K. vide report,Ex.R4.So there was no defect in the meter. The concerned office of the Board is fully entitled to charge the consumer as per actual consumption shown by the meter. No amount of penalty in any manner as theft of electricity energy is being charged from the consumer. The Board is charging the amount as per actual reading shown by the meter. The first reading of the new meter was recorded on 10.11.2009 in which the consumption was shown as 532-15=517 units. The bills have been issued to the complainant as per consumption recorded by the meter and the demand raised by the Board is absolutely legal and there is no illegality in raising the same. 8. We have considered the rival contentions of the parties. 9. The complainant has challenged the amount of Rs.1,03,335/- shown as arrear in the bill,Ex.C3 dated 30.1.2010.The bill,Ex.C3 pertains to the period 9.12.2009 to 9.1.2010.The bill further shows the old reading as 598 and new reading as 655 thereby showing total consumption of 57 units. The total amount of the bill is 104810/-.According to the opposite parties themselves the meter which was removed vide meter change order,Ex.R2 was OK as per the report,Ex.R4 of M.E.Lab, Patiala. The perusal of the bill,Ex.C3 dated 30.1.2010 would show that no details of the amount of Rs.1,03335/- shown as arrears have been given. There is nothing on the record to show as to how this amount has been calculated. There is nothing on the record to prove as to of which period this amount pertains to. There is no demand in the form of notice on the file if this amount was ever claimed from the complainant previously. If this amount of Rs.103335/- is as arrears then the opposite parties must have claimed this amount in the previous bills. However, there is nothing on the record to prove if the complainant was a defaulter and the disputed amount pertains to the defaualting amount. 10. In view of the foregoing discussion 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 Rs.1000/-as costs of the complaint to be paid by the opposite parties to the complainant within a period of one month from the receipt of the copy of the order. The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record. Pronounced. Dated:13.9.2010. President Member Member
| | Mr. Amarjit Singh Dhindsa, Member | HONABLE MR. Inderjit Singh, PRESIDENT | Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member | | 
