BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.
Consumer Complaint No. 83 of 2016
Date of Institution: 19.2.2016
Date of Decision : 21.04.2016
Parshotam Lal Sharma (aged 80 years) son of Sh. Madho Ram Sharma, resident of 36-C, Gali No. 4, Hukam Singh Road, Amritsar
Complainant
Versus
- Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, through its Chairman, The Mall, Patiala.
- SDO (Operation), Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Civil Line Sub Division, Amritsar.
- SDO (Commercial), Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Civil Line Sub Division, Amritsar.
- Amrit Pal Singh, Revenue Accountant, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Civil Line Sub Division, Amritsar
Opposite Parties
Complaint under section 12/13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Present: For the Complainant :Sh.Deepinder Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Parties 1 to 4: Ex-parte
Coram
Sh.S.S.Panesar, President
Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member
Order dictated by:
Sh.S.S. Panesar, President.
1. Parshotam Lal Sharma has brought the instant complaint under section 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that the complainant is having age of 80 years and is a Senior Citizen. He is Income-tax Payee and commanding good respect in the society. An electric connection bearing account No. C16LR070118K is installed by the opposite parties at the residential premises of the complainant since long. The complainant has been paying the bills regularly as and when received and nothing is due or payable against him. As such the complainant is consumer of the opposite party under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and is competent to invoke jurisdiction of this Forum. The opposite parties are issuing the bills adding some exorbitant amounts without explaining any reason since October, 2015. In the bills sent by the opposite parties for the months October, 2015 and December, 2015, they issued exhorbitant bills showing some amounts on account of arrear of current year. However, these bills were got corrected by the complainant from the opposite parties after repeated visits and requests. Now the complainant has again received bill dated 3.2.2016 for an amount of Rs. 29,180/- showing the consumption of 1450 units in which an amount of Rs. 14850/- has been wrongly shown as arrears of the current year. It is pertinent to mention here that last date of the payment of the said bill is shown as 18.2.2016. It is surprising to note that on the very next date from the date of issuance of the said bill i.e. 4.2.2016, the officials of the opposite parties i.e. opposite parties No.2 & 3 visited the spot and arbitrarily disconnected the electricity connection of the complainant without explaining any reason, in the absence of the complainant. The complainant was away to Dhariwal District Gurdaspur to attend the marriage of his near relative and only the aged wife of the complainant was present at the residence. The wife of the complainant made many requests to the officials of the opposite parties and told them that last date of the payment of the impugned bill was 18.2.2016 and the payment of all the previous consumption bills has already been paid and nothing is due or payable by them, but the officials of the opposite parties did not listen to the requests of the wife of the complainant and disconnected the electricity connection installed in the premises of the complainant illegally and without any reason . After reaching home, the complainant was stunned to note the incident and immediately approached the opposite parties and requested them to explain the reason for disconnection of his electricity connection and to restore the same. But , however, officials of the opposite parties did not pay any heed to the requests of the complainant. After about five days thereafter the opposite parties restored the electricity connection due to the various efforts made by the complainant. The complainant is a reputed person and is an Income-tax Payee and also President of Two prominent Schools where more than 1500 students are studying. The son-in-law of the complainant is Sub Divisional Magistrate, Amritsar while the other is Adjucant General of Indian Army. As such the complainant commands great reputation in the society. The disconnection of the electricity connection appears to have been made by the opposite parties to defame the complainant in the society. On receipt of the impugned bill dated 3.2.2016, complainant visited the office of the opposite parties and requested them to correct the bill. But they flatly refused to do the same. Finally the complainant was compelled to deposit the entire amount of the impugned bill on 18.2.2016 for an amount of Rs. 29180/- to avoid further complications . Due to the illegal and wrongful acts of the officials of the opposite parties, complainant suffered a huge loss on account of reputation in the society and also suffered mental tension and harassment at the hands of the opposite parties. Although such loss cannot be compensated in terms of money, yet he claims an amount of Rs. 5 lacs on that account. Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite parties No.1 ,2 & 3 appeared and contested the complaint by filing joint written statement taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint ; that power corporation has rectified the assessed amount already so the present complaint is not sustainable in the eye of law ; that the power corporation got verification as per the bank statement dated 6.2.2016 and overhauled the account of the consumer and adjusted the amount of Rs. 18471/- and now as per the latest bill only Rs. 10,700/- is payable by the consumer on account of consumption of the electricity, so the present complaint is not maintainable ; that due to the introduction of the new SAP System (system application process) in the power corporation, such problems are coming which have been adjusted with manual process until this system works in proper way , power corporation in the meantime have been rectifying such complaints manually ; that the consumer’s connection was disconnected and at the same time connected by the routine checking personals on the knowledge/assurance of submitting the consumption amount by the consumer during their regular duty course. On merits, facts narrated in the complaint are denied. It is denied that bill issued to the consumer from 15.3.2015 to 3.6.2015 for 2337 units amounting to Rs. 16870/- for 80 days on account of consumption of the electricity units against which the consumer made payment for Rs. 16830/- on 8.6.2015 vide receipt No. 300249271. Due to introduction of new SAP system by the PSPCL w.e.f. 15.6.2015 and vide its applicability of this new system this amount could not be credited into the account of the consumer, so the payment made by the consumer continuously reflected in the current bill. The concerned ledger keeper of the PSPCL rectified the current bill as per consumer’s request and as per the assurance to produce the receipt of the payment made on the next date of payment. But in this case the receipt could not be produced by the consumer, as such posting could not be made for the same in time. The amount deposited could not be made in time. Now as per the bank statement generated dated 6.2.2016 by the consumer that he made the payment of Rs. 16830/- vide cheque No. 525063 , the record verified that the amount was credited into the PSPCL account and an amount of Rs. 18471/- with surcharge has been adjusted in the consumer’s account. Now finally, in the current bill the amount of Rs. 18471/- has been adjusted and the consumer is liable to pay Rs. 10,700/- only on account of consumption of electricity units. Remaining facts mentioned in the complaint are also denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint with cost was made.
3. Sh.Amritpal Singh, opposite party No.4 although came present on service of the notice, yet he suffered a statement that he does not want to file any separate written statement and written version filed on behalf of opposite parties No.1 to 3 may be read on his behalf as well.
4. In his bid to prove the case, complainant made in the witness box as his own witness and filed duly sworn affidavit Ex.C-1 in support of the allegations made in the complaint and also produced copy of rectified bill Ex.C-2, copy of bank statement Ex.C-3, copy of bill dated 3.2.2016 Ex.C-4, copy of the certificates Ex.C-5 and Ex.C-6, copy of identity card Ex.C-7 and closed his evidence.
5. Opposite parties did not lead any evidence rather they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 12.4.2016.
6. We have heard the ld.counsel for the complainant and have carefully gone through the evidence on record.
7. The complainant Parshotam Lal Sharma has submitted his affidavit Ex.C1 in which he has reiterated the facts as detailed in the complaint. Although the Opposite Parties did file the written reply to the allegations made in the complaint, but however, there is no specific denial. It is an admitted fact that inflated bill Ex.C4 dated 3.2.2016 payable uptill 18.2.2016 was issued to the complainant for payment of a sum of Rs.29,180/-, but however, without waiting for the payment of the impugned amount or furnishing any objection to the inflated bill, the Opposite Parties hasten to disconnect the electric connection of the complainant on 4.2.2016 itself, without issuing mandatory notice even. This shows that the disconnection of the electric connection of the complainant has been made illegally, arbitrarily and without applying the principle of natural justice. The connection was restored only after 5 days from its disconnection when the complainant went from pillar to post for getting his grievance redressed without any fault on his part. For issuing of inflated bill, the Opposite Parties have taken plea that SAP System was introduced by PSPCL which was defective, but however for introducing the defective SAP System, the poor consumer can not be made to suffer and blame for that can not be shifted to the complainant. It is in evidence that even on previous occasion as well, an excessive billing was made allegedly on account of arrears of current year, when no such arrears were either due or payable by the complainant. All this shows that Opposite Parties were bent upon to harass the complainant who is Senior Citizen of the age of 80 years. The entire evidence adduced by the complainant has gone unrebutted on record because after filing the written reply, the Opposite Parties wilfully suffered exparte which means that they have impliedly admitted the allegations made in the complaint. Opposite Parties could not muster the courage to make into witness box to deny the allegations of the complainant. As such, the only inference which can not be drawn under the circumstances would be that the complainant has suffered mental agony and physical pain on account of deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties and the complainant is entitled to be adequately compensated.
8. Although the complainant has made a claim for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs.5 lacs, but he has not given any detail nor any documentary proof to prove the actual loss occasioned to him on account of deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, but this Forum is competent to indulge in guess working and further use its experience to assess the actual loss suffered by the complainant. The complainant is entitled to such compensation only to make good the actual loss suffered by him and no exorbitant or fanciful amount can be awarded as compensation.
9. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and loss occasioned by the complainant on account of deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, the complainant is entitled to grant of compensation to the tune of Rs.15,000/- from the Opposite Parties while a sum of Rs.5,000/- is imposed upon the Opposite Parties on account of litigation expenses and the complaint stands disposed of accordingly ex-parte. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the receipt of copy of the order; failing which, awarded amount shall carry interest @ 6% p.a from the date of passing of order until full and final recovery. 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.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated : 21.4.2016
/R/ ( S.S.Panesar )
President
(Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) Member
