BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FEROZEPUR
C.C. No. 425 of 2014 Date of Institution: 7.11.2014
Date of Decision: 28.1.2015
Mohinder Singh, aged 70 years, Son of Sohan Singh, resident of village Bandala, P.O. Rukne Wala, Tehsil and District, Ferozepur.
....... Complainant
Versus
1. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, The Mall, Patiala, through its Secretary/Chairman/Managing Director.
2. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Sub Division Mallanwala, Circle Ferozepur, through its S.D.O.
........ Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
* * * * *
PRESENT :
For the complainant : Sh. M.L. Chug, Advocate
For opposite parties : Sh. Manjit Singh Sandhu, Advocate
QUORUM
S. Gurpartap Singh Brar, President
S. Gyan Singh, Member
ORDER
GURPARTAP SINGH BRAR, PRESIDENT:-
Brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant has got installed domestic electric connection bearing No.M67RW840493M in his
C.C. No. 425 of 2014 \\2//
house at village Bandala. The complainant received bill dated 29.9.2014 for the period from 21.7.2014 to 19.9.2014 for Rs.1,68,170/- in which an amount of Rs.1,67,325/- has been included as sundry charges. As per the bill, 135 units of electricity shown to have been consumed by the complainant. On receiving the bill, the complainant approached the opposite party and it transpired that the amount of Rs.1,67,325/- has been claimed as arrears due against Buta Singh, who happens to the son of the complainant. Further it has been pleaded that the son of the complainant was also planted a false case of theft and a recovery of the amount in question shown as sundry charges was claimed for him. The opposite parties have also claimed an amount of Rs.1,47,875/- from Buta Singh through a complaint filed before Permanent Lok Adalat. The amount of Rs.1,67,325/- was not recoverable from the complainant. The complainant has already paid the consumption charges to the opposite party and nothing is due against the complainant. The complainant has already paid the consumption charges to the opposite party and nothing is due against the complainant. The charges due against Buta Singh, son of the complainant, cannot be recovered from the complainant. Pleading deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant has prayed that the opposite parties be directed to withdraw the demand of Rs.1,67,325/- raised in the bill dated 19.9.2014. Further a sum of
C.C. No. 425 of 2014 \\3//
Rs.50,000/- has been claimed as compensation for harassment and Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared and filed their written reply to the complaint, wherein it has been pleaded that the complainant and his son Buta Singh are living in the same house in a joint family. Buta Singh son of Mohinder Singh is running an Atta Chakki in the same premises with commercial connection bearing No. SP43/133. The connection of Buta Singh was checked in the M.E. Lab and it was found both the M.E seals were tempered and were reinstated by using the adhesive and ultrasonic welding of the meter was destroyed. A checking report was prepared and a notice dated 15.7.2013 for Rs.1,26,582/- was issued to the Buta Singh and he was asked to file any objection or to deposit the amount in question, but the said Buta Singh, son of the complainant neither files any objection nor deposited the amount in question with P.S.P.C.L. Opposite party filed a complaint before Permanent Lok Adalat for the recovery of Rs.1,47,875/-. The said amount was added in the bill of Mohinder Singh, father of Buta Singh as a sundry charges legally and as per rules and regulations. Other allegations of the complaint have been denied and dismissal of the complaint has been prayed for.
3. Learned counsel for complainant tendered into evidence Ex.
C.C. No. 425 of 2014 \\4//
C-1 to Ex.C-3 and closed evidence on behalf of the complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite party Nos.1 & 2 tendered into evidence Ex.OP-1 & 2/1 to Ex.OP- 1&2/6 and closed evidence on behalf of opposite parties Nos.1&2.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the file.
5. The complainant has challenged the demand of the opposite parties of Rs.1,67,325/- raised vide bill dated 19.9.2014 Ex.C-2 as sundry charges and allowances. Admittedly, the said amount pertains to the connection of Buta Singh, son of the complainant. The opposite parties have already moved an application Ex.C-3 before the Permanent Lok Adalat for recovery of the said amount from Buta Sigh son of the complainant. No evidence has been placed on the file by the opposite parties that the complainant and his son Buta Singh are living together in the same premises, where the connection in question has been installed and they have joint mess, as has been alleged by the opposite parties. It is well settled law that the arrears pertaining to connection of one consumer cannot be recovered from the other consumer. Even no separate notice was given to the complainant by the opposite parties before raising the impugned demand in bill dated 19.9.2014 Ex.C-2, as was required under Regulation No.124.1 of the Sales Regulations of the P.S.P.C.L. Therefore, the opposite
C.C. No. 425 of 2014 \\5//
parties are guilty of rendering deficient services to the complainant and the impugned demand of the opposite parties of Rs.1,67,325/- is liable to be set aside.
6. In view of the above discussion, this complaint is accepted and the impugned demand of the opposite parties of Rs.1,67,325/- raised vide bill dated 19.9.2014 Ex.C-2 as sundry charges and allowances is hereby quashed. Further the opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. The amount, if any, deposited by the complainant against the impugned demand, be refunded to the complainant. 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
28.1.2015 (Gurpartap Singh Brar)
President
(Gyan Singh) Member
