BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
FORUM, FEROZEPUR.
C.C. No. 48 of 2015 Date of Institution: 02.02.2015
Date of Decision: 15.07.2015
Bharat son of Mulkh Raj aged about 40 years resident of Basti Shekhan Wali, Ferozepur City.
....... Complainant
Versus
Assistant Engineer/S.D.O., City Sub Division, Punjab State Power
Corporation Limited, Ferozepur City.
........ Opposite party
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
* * * * *
PRESENT :
For the complainant : Sh. Vishal Arora Advocate
For the opposite party : Sh. Hardeep Bajaj Advocate
QUORUM
S. Gurpartap Singh Brar, President
Smt. Inderjeet Kaur, Member
C.C.No. 48 of 2015 //2//
ORDER
GURPARTAP SINGH BRAR, PRESIDENT:-
Brief facts of the complaint are that an electric connection bearing account No.M23BL440574H with sanctioned load of 0.38 KW has been installed in his name. The complainant belongs to Scheduled Caste category as he has taken the above noted connection in that category quota as the Punjab Govt. is giving a concession of 200 units per month to the persons belonging to Scheduled Caste Category. The complainant received a bill dated 11.05.2013 for an amount of Rs. 1860/- showing consumption of 293 units from the opposite party, which includes the sundry charges amounting to Rs.1857/-. The complainant approached the opposite party immediately and requested it to correct the bill in question as per his actual consumption, but to no effect. The complainant again received a bill dated 03.11.2013 amounting to Rs.1070/- showing consumption of 266 units for the billing cycle in which included sundry charges amounting to Rs. 120/-. The complainant approached the opposite party and requested it to correct the bill in question, but the opposite party put on the matter on one pretext or the other and threatened the complainant for disconnecting the electric connection. The complainant has to deposit Rs.1977/- with the opposite party, which is wrong and illegal. The status of the meter is okay.
C.C.No. 48 of 2015 //3//
Pleading deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party the complainant has prayed that the opposite party be directed to refund a sum of Rs.1977/- illegally charged from him as sundry charges alongwith interest @12% per annum, to pay Rs. 80,000/- as compensation for mental agony, pain and harassment and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. Upon notice, the opposite party appeared and filed written reply to the complaint. In its written reply, opposite party has taken some preliminary objections interalia that the complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands; that the complainant has no cause of action and that the complaint of the complainant is false and frivolous. On merits, it has been pleaded that the complainant is holder of an electric connection No.M23BL44/0574H, which has been installed in scheduled caste category. It has been pleaded that the opposite party issued a bill dated 11.05.2013 for Rs.1857/- as sundry charges to the complainant. When the complainant approached the opposite party and equired about the above said sundry charges, the opposite party was given detail of the amount of Rs.1857/- added in his bill. Further it has been pleaded that Rs. 220/- as security amount of electricity connection of complainant was already lying deposited with the opposite party. The amount of Rs. 1857/- was found recoverable from the complainant and therefore, the said amount of
C.C.No. 48 of 2015 //4//
Rs.1857 was added in the bill of the complainant. As such now an amount of Rs. 2077/- is lying deposited as security of the complainant. This amount is of the companiant and has not been recovered on account of any penalty or consumption. And this amount of security has been reflected in the bill of the complainant as is shown in the bill dated 24.10.2014, which the complainant has produced with his complaint It has been further pleaded that the opposite party issued a bill dated 03.11.2013 for Rs 1070/- to the complainant in which Rs.950/- were due against the complainant. Other allegations of the complaint have been denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-6 and closed evidence on behalf of the complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party tendered into evidence Ex.O.P-1 to Ex.O.P-6 and closed evidence on behalf of the opposite party.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the file.
5. On the basis of the evidence of the complainant, the learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently contended that the complainant received a bill dated 11.05.2013 for an amount of Rs. 1857- as sundry charges from the opposite party. The complainant approached
C.C.No. 48 of 2015 //5//
the opposite party immediately and requested it to correct the bill in question as per his actual consumption.The complainant belongs to Scheduled Caste category as the Punjab Govt. is giving a concession of 200 units per month to the persons belonging to Scheduled Caste Category, but the opposite party did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant. On the other hand, the opposite party has failed to adopt the procedure for raising demand of arrears of consumption of electricity. As per Regulation No.124.1 of the Sales Regulations, the opposite party was required to issue a separate notice for raising the demand in question. But in the present case, the opposite party has neither pleaded nor produced any evidence to show that any such notice was ever issued to the consumer/complainant for raising the demand in question. The opposite party has straightway added Rs.1857/- as sundry charges in the bill dated 11.05.2013 of the complainant, which is wrong and against the rules and regulations of the PSPCL itself. No opportunity of being heard has been provided to the complainant by the opposite parties before raising the impugned demand. Therefore, the demand of the opposite party is not justified and accordingly is liable to be set aside.
6. In view of the above discussion, this complaint is accepted with Rs.1000/- as compensation for mental agony, pain and harassment and Rs.500/- as litigation expenses and the demand of the opposite party
C.C.No. 48 of 2015 //6//
raised vide bill dated 11.05.2013 Ex.-C-2 as sundry charges is quashed. This order is directed to be complied with within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced
15.07.2015
(Gurpartap Singh Brar)
President
(Inderjeet Kaur)
Member
