Order dictated by:
Sh.S.S.Panesar,President.
- Sh. Amar Nath complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act on the allegations that complainant is having an electricity connection bearing No. C 15 HP 030027 which has been installed at his residence. The complainant has been making payment of the bills regularly without any default. Complainant is receiving the bills ranged between Rs. 1500/- to Rs. 2000/- bimonthly. But the opposite party vide bill dated 26.11.2015 raised a demand of Rs. 14000/- which is illegal. The complainant approached the opposite party and challenged the meter vide letter dated 27.11.2015 stating that the same is in damaged condition .The official of the opposite party marked the same on 27.11.2015 and report for challenge meter from ME Lab in which it was stated that during currency period pulse of the meter was dead . The report was issued vide memo No. 505 dated 5.5.2016 and the opposite party raised a demand of Rs. 27,217/- which is totally illegal. The complainant has sought for the following reliefs vide instant complaint :-
- Opposite party be directed not to charge the amount of Rs. 27,217- imposed vide memo No. 505 dated 5.5.2016.
- Opposite party be also directed not to disconnect electricity connection bearing account No. HP 03/27-3002172187 installed at the residence of the complainant.
- Compensation to the tune of Rs. 10000/- may also be awarded to the complainant alongwith litigation expenses.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite party appeared and contested the complaint by filing written statement taking certain preliminary objections therein inter alia that present complaint is not maintainable ; that complainant has no cause of action or locus standi to file the present complaint against the opposite party. On merits, it is submitted that electric connection bearing account No. HP 03/027 having sanctioned load of 1.820 KW under DS category has been installed at the premises of the complainant. The bills were being issued to the complainant on the basis of actual consumption i.e. as per reading of the meter. Bill dated 26.11.2015 is legal and valid. It was submitted that on 11.2.2016 the checking of the meter in question was made by Er.Baljit Singh,JE, who found the meter defective. Thereafter , he changed the meter of the complainant at the spot vide LCR No. 367/86 dated 11.2.106. Thereafter the checking was made by Er. Pawan Kumar, SDO. The meter was packed in the presence of the consumer and the same was got checked from ME Lab. During checking the meter was found dead. Earlier the bill was sent to the consumer till reading 3502 and when the meter was removed, the reading was 5366, as such the bill of difference units was sent to the complainant vide memo No. 505 dated 5.5.2016 demanding the amount in question. Thereafter another letter vide memo No. 718 dated 16.6.2016 demanding an amount of Rs. 17m134/- was sent to the complainant. But the complainant has not made the payment of the amount demanded in the said notice. The said demand is legal and valid. The bill has been sent on the basis of actual consumption and there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and a prayer for dismissal of complaint was made.
3. In his bid to prove the case complainant tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C-1 alongwith documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-7 and closed his evidence.
4. To rebut the aforesaid evidence Sh.N.S.Sandhu,Adv.counsel for the opposite party tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Vipan Vig SDO Ex.OP1 alongwith documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP9 and closed the evidence on behalf of the opposite party.
5. We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record on file.
6. On the basis of the evidence on record, ld. Counsel for the opposite party has vehemently contended that it is an admitted fact that complainant is the consumer of the opposite party having electricity connection bearing account No.C15HP030027 installed at the residence of the complainant. It is also not disputed that bill in dispute for an amount of Rs. 27,217/- dated 5.5.2016 was issued to the complainant vide memo No. 505, copy of the bill accounts for Ex.C-3. The complainant challenged the meter on 11.2.2016. The checking of the meter in question was made by Er. Baljit Singh, JE, who found the meter defective and thereafter he changed the meter of the complainant at the spot vide LCR No. 367/86 dated 11.2.2016, copy whereof is Ex.OP5 on record. Thereafter checking of the meter was made by Er. Pawan Kumar, SDO operation. The meter was packed in the presence of the consumer. Meter was got checked from ME Lab and during checking the meter was found dead. ME Lab report accounts for Ex.OP7. Earlier bill was sent to the complainant uptil reading of 3502 and when the meter was removed the reading was noted as 5366. As such bill of the difference of units was sent to the complainant. Thereafter, a letter bearing memo No. 505 dated 5.5.2016 was sent to the complainant demanding the amount in question. Thereafter another letter bearing memo No. 718 dated 16.6,2016 demanding an amount of Rs. 17,134/- was sent to the complainant. But the complainant has not made payment of the amount demanded vide said notice. The demand is legal and valid. Since the disputed bill already stands rectified, the complainant has been left with no grouse absolutely . As such the instant complaint is liable to be dismissed and the same may be dismissed accordingly.
7. But, however, from the appreciation of the facts and circumstances of the case, it becomes evident that initially the opposite party issued disputed bill for an amount of Rs. 27,217/-, copy whereof is Ex.C-3 on record. But , however, later on the opposite party rectified the bill and notice for payment of an amount of Rs. 17,134/- was sent to the complainant, copy whereof is Ex.OP4 on record. It appears that bill in dispute has been sent wrongly by the opposite party without following the proper procedure for assessing the due amount. It is apparent that the opposite party has acted negligently and have resorted to unfair trade practice in issuing the impugned bill. The opposite party is also deficient in service because it has caused mental agony & physical pain to the complainant. The complainant has already deposited 50% of the disputed amount in response to order dated 3.6.2016 passed by this Forum and after adjusting that amount , the due amount against memo No. 718 dated 16.6.2016 shall be payable by the complainant , to the opposite party against receipt. But, however, for deficiency in service, opposite party is directed to pay compensation to the complainant to the tune of Rs. 2000/- besides cost of litigation is assessed at Rs. 1000/- . The complaint stands disposed off accordingly. Compliance of this order be made within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order ; failing which, the awarded amount shall carry interest @ 6% p.a from the date of filing of the complaint until full and final recovery. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated :3.10.2016
/R/
