BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.

Consumer Complaint No. 388 of 2015

Date of Institution: 12.6.2015

    Date of Decision:   19.02.2016

Karnail Singh son of Vir Singh resident of 957-B, Dr. Het Ram Colony, Amritsar

Complainant

Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., through its SDO (Commercial) West Sub Division, Chheharta, Amritsar

Opposite Party

Complaint under section 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present:    For the Complainant                  :  Sh.Deepinder Singh, Advocate

               For the Opposite Party                : Sh. Anil Sharma,Advocate

Quorum:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President

Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member

Sh.Anoop Sharma, Member

Order dictated by:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President.

1.       Present complaint has been filed by Karnail Singh under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that he is consumer of electricity connection bearing account No. A26KH310889K under DS category. According to the complainant he has been making payment of all the electricity bills regulations. Complainant has received a bill dated 5.6.2015 for Rs. 30390/- for 925 units for the period from 23.3.2015 to 5.6.2015 in which opposite party raised a demand of Rs. 8232/-as sundry charges and Rs. 12957/- as previous arrears . On receipt of bill complainant approached the opposite party  but the opposite party is not listening to the genuine request of the complainant . Alleging the same to be deficiency in service complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite party to quash bill dated 5.6.2015 for Rs. 30,390/- and further to issue correct bill .

2.       On notice, opposite party appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that bill dated 5.6.2015 for Rs. 30390/- has been issued according to the actual consumption of the electricity meter of the complainant. As per SAP system of the opposite party bill of Rs. 30,370/- which includes  the current bill of 925 units of Rs. 6210/- and arrears of previous bill dated 17.1.2015 amounting to Rs. 8840/- alongwith surcharge  which the complainant did not pay and bill dated 22.3.2015 amounting to Rs. 5028/- alongwith surcharge and total amount stands Rs. 14728/- as arrears instead of Rs. 12997/-. Details of sundry charges are that the meter of the complainant was changed vide MCO No. 6/21256 dated 17.10.2014 effected on 27.10.2014 on the initial reading of meter 01 and the reading of old meter was 11032. Bill dated 17.11.2014 was issued on average basis for 165 units  only,whereas the actual consumption was 244 units so amount of Rs. 493/- was to be paid by the complainant. Reading on 20.9.2014 was 10481 and on 16.5.2014 reading was 9633 but the average bill was issued for 177 units only whereas the actual consumption was 1399 units (11032-9633= 1399 units) total amount which was to be paid by the complainant was Rs. 9431/-. While submitting that bill dated 5.6.2015  for Rs. 30,390/- was issued according to rules and regulations of the opposite party. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.

3.       Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1, copies of electricity bills Ex.C-2 and C-3.

4.       Opposite party tendered into evidence copy of order dated 24.6.2015 Ex.OP1, copy of MCO Ex.OP2, copy of account detail Ex.OP3, copy of SAP report Ex.OP4, affidavit of Er. Anish Kumar,SDO Ex.OP5.

5.       We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties, arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the parties and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for the parties.

6        From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it is clear that complainant is the consumer of electricity vide account No. A26KH310889K under DS category. Complainant  has submitted that he received bill dated 5.6.2015 Ex.C-3 for Rs. 30,390- for 925 units consumption for the period from 23.3.2015 to 5.6.2015 vide which the opposite party has added amount of Rs. 8232/- as sundry charges and Rs. 12957/- as previous arrears. The complainant approached the opposite party for the details of the previous arrears and sundry charges, but the opposite party could not explain the details of the same. Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.

7.       Whereas the case of the opposite party is that the impugned bill dated 5.6.2015 Ex.C-3 has been issued according to actual consumption of the electricity by the complainant. As per SAP system of the opposite party bill of Rs. 30,370/- which includes  the current bill of 925 units of Rs. 6210/- and arrears of previous bill dated 17.1.2015 amounting to Rs. 8840/- alongwith surcharge  which the complainant did not pay and bill dated 22.3.2015 amounting to Rs. 5028/- alongwith surcharge and total amount stands Rs. 14728/- as arrears. Details of sundry charges are that the meter of the complainant was changed vide MCO No. 6/21256 dated 17.10.2014 effected on 27.10.2014 on the initial reading of meter 01 and the reading of old meter was 11032. Bill dated 17.11.2014 was issued on average basis for 165 units  only,whereas the actual consumption was 244 units so amount of Rs. 493/- was to be paid by the complainant. Reading on 20.9.2014 was 10481 and on 16.5.2014 reading was 9633 but the average bill was issued for 177 units only whereas the actual consumption was 1399 units (11032-9633= 1399 units) total amount which was to be paid by the complainant was Rs. 9431/-. So the bill dated 5.6.2015 was issued for Rs. 30,390/- as per rules and regulations of the opposite party. Ld.counsel for the opposite party submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.

8.       From the entire above discussion, it is clear that opposite party  issued impugned bill dated 5.6.2015 Ex.C-3 to the complainant for Rs. 30,390/- for the current consumption of 925 units for the period from 23.3.2015 to 5.6.2015. In that bill the opposite party has charged Rs. 14728/- as arrears, current consumption charges Rs. 6200/- and the opposite party has also charged Rs. 9427/- as sundry charges. It is clear that the complainant was issued bill dated 17.1.2015 for Rs. 9612/-, but the complainant did not make the payment of this bill. Similarly the complainant was issued bill dated 22.3.2015 for Rs. 5116/- and the complainant also did not pay this bill. So the complainant was in arrears of payment of these bills amounting to Rs. 14,729/- including surcharge and this amount was claimed by the opposite party in the next bill i.e. impugned bill dated 5.6.2015 Ex.C-3. The opposite party was justified in charging this amount from the complainant in the current consumption bill as arrears of the previous bill.

9.       However, the opposite party has charged Rs. 9427/- as sundry charges on the basis of overhauling  of the account of the complainant for the period from 16.5.2014 to 17.11.2014 due to the fact that the meter of the complainant was removed vide MCO dated 17.10.2014 effected on 27.10.2014. Resultantly the bills were issued to the complainant on average basis whereas the actual reading was found to be 11029 and the complainant was charged upto reading of 9633 on 16.5.2013 and the complainant was liable to pay for 1399 units extra. But before charging this amount in the current consumption bill, no prior notice was issued to the complainant by the opposite party asking the complainant to deposit this amount of Rs. 9427/- or to file objections, if any. So the complainant was not given any opportunity of being heard before charging this amount under head sundry charges from the complainant in the current consumption bill dated 5.6.2015 Ex.C-3 . As per regulation 124.1  of the Electricity Supply Regulations, opposite party cannot include any arrears or any other amount from the consumer in the current consumption bill without giving prior notice to the consumer. Therefore, opposite party has violated the provisions of its own rules and regulations while charging this amount of Rs. 9427/- under head sundry charges in the bill Ex.C-3. So this demand of Rs. 9427/- raised by the opposite party under the head sundry charges from the complainant in the current consumption bill Ex.C-3 dated 5.6.2015 is not sustainable in the eyes of law and is liable to be set-aside.

10.     Resultantly the complaint is partly allowed and the impugned demand of Rs. 9427/- raised under the head sundry charges vide bill dated 5.6.2015 Ex.C-3 is hereby set-aside. However, opposite party can charge this amount from the  complainant by following proper procedure as law/procedure laid down under regulation 124.1 of the Electricity Supply Regulations i.e. after giving prior notice and after giving proper opportunity of being heard to the complainant. Whereas the other demand raised by the opposite party in the current consumption bill  of Rs.14729/- as arrears is justified. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

19.02.2016                                                           ( Bhupinder Singh )

President

/R/                                      (Anoop Sharma)               ( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa)

     Member                                        Member