Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Camp Court, Amritsar

Consumer Complaint No  :   RBT 315 of 2017

Date of Institution                      : 18.05.2017

Date of Decision               : 04.05.2022

Roshan Lal son of Sh. Karam Chand resident of Maqbool Pura, Amritsar.

                                                                             …Complainant

                                                Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. Through its Managing Director/ Chairman, The Mall, Patiala service through S.D.O Industrial Commercial Sub Division, Mall Mandi, Amritsar.

                                                                             …Opposite Party

Complaint Under Section 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Quorum:               Sh. Charanjit Singh, President

Ms. NidhiVerma, Member

For Complainant                     Sh. Saurabh Sharma Advocate

For Opposite Party                           Sh. N.S. Sandhu Advocate

PER:

Charanjit Singh, President;

1        The present complaint has been received from the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Amritsar by the order of the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Punjab, Chandigarh for its disposal.

2        The complainant has filed the present complaint by invoking the provisions of Consumer Protection Act under Section  11 and 12 against the opposite parties on the allegations that the complainant is owner of the property consists of one shop on the ground floor and remaining building is used as residential purpose. The complainant had obtained an electric connection bearing account No. 3002203188 (DS-Tariff) with sanctioned load of 2.600 KW. Since the purchase of his property the complainant is using the electric connection at his residential premises. After the purchase of this property, few years ago some of the officials came to the premises of the complainant and asked him to change his tariff from DS (Domestic supply) to NRS (Non residential supply) as there is a shop on the ground floor. Inspite of the fact that the shop was lying closed, the complainant as per the advice of the official of the opposite party changed his tariff from DS to NRS Tariff. Later on the complainant open a STD/PCO shop which is situated on the ground floor of his building for earning his livelihood by way of self employment. But due to some financial problems, the complainant constrained to close his business. Thus, as per the facts stated above, the complainant having hired services of the opposite party for consideration, is a consumer as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. In the month of April, 2015, the complainant shifted from Amritsar to Ambala for business purposes alongwith his family and locked the above said building and left it vacant and accordingly information was given to the concerned officials of the PSPCL vide a letter dated 02.04.2015 contents of which are as follows. “ I have an electric connection bearing account No. 3002203188. I am shifting to Ambala for business purpose. I will be able to pay the MMC only to the board” so the complainant shifted to Ambala. In the month of Feb 2017, the complainant shifted back to Amritsar and started living in the above said building. In the month of March, 2017, the officials of the opposite party came to the premises of the complainant and asked him to pay Rs. 41,797/- as monthly minimum charges during the period of building lying locked. They asked the complainant to pay his amount as soon as possible else their connection will be disconnected. So, the complainant on 24.3.2017 deposited the amount of Rs. 41,797/- vide receipt No. 214000046514 dated 24.3.2017 with the opposite party. The complainant was shocked and surprised to receive an electricity bill dated 10.5.2017 for an amount of Rs. 2,99,690/- (before due date) and Rs. 3,04,685/- (after due date) issued by the opposite party without disclosing the details thereof to the complainant. No such amount was outstanding against the complainant as he had already paid the entire monthly minimum charges amount to the opposite party on 24.3.2017.  The complainant on receipt of the said bill, immediately approached the officials of the opposite party at Sub Division for the correction of the bill above said and even presented copies of the previous payment receipt thereof but the officials of the opposite party did not care to listen to the complainant and rather insisted upon full payment of the bill. The impugned demand raised in the bill under challenge is liable to be set aside being totally wrong, illegal, arbitrary, null and void, against the sales and regulations as well as principle of natural justice. The complainant had paid the entire monthly minimum charges to the opposite party then the question of raising another demand of Rs. 2,99,690/- through bill dated 10.5.2017 does not arise. Before issuing the impugned bill, the opposite party had neither issued any show cause notice to the complainant nor the opposite party has afforded any personal hearing to the complainant and as such, impugned demand is against the principle of natural justice. The complainant has prayed that the opposite party may kindly be directed to withdraw the impugned demand of Rs. 2,99,292/- through bill dated 10.5.2017 or in the alternative, the same may kindly be set aside and opposite party may also be directed to issue regular bill and further directed the opposite party not to disconnect the electric connection of the complainant and prayed Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation expenses.

3        After formal admission of the complaint, notice was issued to Opposite Party and opposite party appeared through counsel and filed written version and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable. The complainant has got no cause of action or locus standi to file the present complaint against the opposite party. On merits, it was pleaded that the complainant is consumer having an electric connection bearing account No. JN59/0072 having new connection No. 3002203188 having sanctioned load of 2.60 KW under NRS category. The complainant has not made any payment of the electricity bills to the opposite party. It is a non residential connection and the same has been installed in the shop. On 9.5.2017 the electricity connection of the complainant was checked by the officials of the opposite party and it was reported by the checking team that the connection of the consumer was checked as it was N Code w.e.f. 8.7.2015 as per connection list. The meter was installed in the Meter box inside the premises of the consumer and the pulse of the meter is running by applying load and electricity is being consumed. Action be taken against the consumer as per the rules and regulations of the department. The reading of the meter at the spot was noted as 45217 units. Spot memo was prepared but the complainant refused to sign the same. Thereafter on the basis of checking report, the bill in question dated 10.5.2017 was sent to the complainant and he is bound to pay the same. The said bill is legal and valid and the complainant is bound to pay the same. The complainant is not entitled to any compensation as alleged in this Para. The opposite party has denied the other contents of the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the same.  

5        To prove his case, the complainant has placed on record affidavit of complainant Ex. C-1, affidavit of Lakhwinder Singh Ex. C-2, affidavit of Harbhajan Singh Ex. C-3, copy of bill Ex. C-4, copy of payment receipt Ex. C-5, copy of the letter Ex. C-6, affidavit of Raj Rani Ex. C-7, copies of bills Ex. C-8 to Ex. C-11 and closed the evidence.  The opposite party has tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh. Vipan Vig SDO Ex. OP1, copy of checking report Ex. OP2, copy of consumption data Ex. OP3 and closed the evidence.

6        We have heard the Ld. counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.

7        From the combined and harmonious reading of the pleadings is going to prove on record that the complainant is using NRS connection and the complainant open a STD/PCO shop which is situated on the ground floor of his building for earning his livelihood by way of self employment. But due to some financial problems, the complainant closed his business. As such, the complainant is consumer of the opposite party. It is further case of the complainant that in the month of April, 2015, the complainant shifted from Amritsar to Ambala for business purposes alongwith his family and locked the above said building and left it vacant. The complainant has given intimation to the concerned officials of the PSPCL vide a letter dated 02.04.2015 Ex.C-6.  The complainant shifted to Ambala. To prove the fact, that the complainant shifted to Ambala he placed on record affidavit Ex. C-2 of Lakhwinder Singh son of  Shingara Singh resident of 3134/15, Gali No. 13, Mehta Road Maqboolpura Amritsar, who is close friend of the complainant and he has stated in his affidavit that from April 2015 till Feb 2017, the complainant alongwith his family members had shifted from Amritsar to Ambala and he had locked and closed the house where he is residing during that period and no member of his family was residing in his house.  The complainant has placed on record affidavit Ex. C-3 of Harbhajan Singh son of Shangara Singh resident of Abadi Indira Colony Majitha Road Amritsar who is milk seller and he stated in his affidavit that he is supplying the milk to the complainant at his residential property where he is residing and he has been visiting him almost daily to supply the milk but from April, 2015 till Feb 2017, he alongwith his family members had shifted from Amritsar to Ambala and he had locked and closed his house and it remained locked/ closed during the said period and he did not supply milk to him during this period. No family member of the complainant was residing there.  The complainant has also placed on record affidavit Ex. C-7 of Raj Rani w/o Subash Chander resident of village Sabapur Karsan, District Ambala and she stated in her affidavit that from April 2015 till Feb 2017 he (complainant) alongwith his family members had shifted from Amritsar to Ambala and had been residing in their house as tenant.  As such, the above said evidence proved on record that the complainant alongwith his family members shifted from Amritsar to Ambala and remained there for the period from April 2015 till Feb 2017.  It is further case of the complainant that in the month of Feb 2017, the complainant shifted/returned back to Amritsar and started living in the above said building. In the month of March, 2017, the officials of the opposite party came to the premises of the complainant and asked him to pay Rs.41,797/- as monthly minimum charges during the period of building lying locked which the complainant has paid to the opposite party vide receipt dated 24.3.2017 Ex. C-5. The complainant was shocked and surprised to receive an electricity bill dated 10.5.2017 for an amount of Rs. 2,99,690/- (before due date) and Rs. 3,04,685/- (after due date) issued by the opposite party without disclosing the details thereof to the complainant.  After that the complainant approached the officials of the opposite party at Sub Division for the correction of the bill but the officials of the opposite party did not care to listen to the complainant and rather insisted upon full payment of the bill. On the other hands, the stand of opposite party is that the complainant is consumer having an electric connection bearing account No. JN59/0072 having new connection No. 3002203188 having sanctioned load of 2.60 KW under NRS category. It is a non residential connection and the same has been installed in the shop. The connection in question is installed in the building, i.e. house and shop of plaintiff and complainant pleaded in his pleadings that the complainant open a STD/PCO shop which is situated on the ground floor of his building for earning his livelihood by way of self employment. As such, the complainant is consumer of the opposite party and present complaint is maintainable.  It is further stand of the opposite party that on 9.5.2017 the electricity connection of the complainant was checked by the officials of the opposite party and it was reported by the checking team that the connection of the consumer was checked as it was N Code w.e.f. 8.7.2015 as per connection list. The meter was installed in the Meter box inside the premises of the consumer and the pulse of the meter is running by applying load and electricity is being consumed. The reading of the meter at the spot was noted as 45217 units. Spot memo was prepared at the spot but the complainant refused to sign the same. Thereafter, on the basis of checking report, the bill in question dated 10.5.2017 was sent to the complainant and he is bound to pay the same. The said bill is legal and valid and the complainant is bound to pay the same. The opposite party has placed on record one document i.e. inspection report Ex. OP2 on which it has been written that that the connection of the consumer was checked as it was N Code w.e.f. 8.7.2015 as per connection list. The meter was installed in the Meter box inside the premises of the consumer and the pulse of the meter is running by applying load and electricity is being consumed. Action be taken as per rules and regulations of PSPCL.  After that on the basis of said checking report amount was imposed in the bill of the complainant. On the said checking report it has been written that the consumer refused to sign but the opposite party has not joined any person of the locality to establish the checking. The opposite party has also not placed on record affidavit of any officials who allegedly checked the connection of the complainant. Another document Ex. OP/3 placed on record by the opposite party is three years consumption data. In which the status of meter is shown as ‘N’ w.e.f. 1/2015 to 16.4.2017, however on 8.7.2015 status of meter is shown as ‘L’.  The stand of the complainant that the he alongwith his family was not in the premises for disputed period itself proved by the document of opposite party i.e. Ex. OP3 which shows that the official of the opposite party has not taken the reading and status of meter is shown as ‘N’.  The complainant has made the payment of minimum charges of Rs. 41,797/- vide receipt dated 24.3.2017 Ex. C-4 to the opposite party. The opposite party has bill on the basis of reading for 774 days i.e. period from 26.3.2015 to 9.5.2017 on the basis of consumption. The status of the meter themselves shown by the opposite party in their consumption data as ‘N’ and now the opposite party is alleging that the bill is on the basis of actual consumption which is not admitted. Moreover, the evidence placed on record by the complainant proved that he remained Ambala and his premises was locked. The opposite party has sent the bill Ex. C-4 on the basis of one inspection report Ex. OP-2 which has not duly been proved by the opposite party by placing on record affidavit of any concerned official. The opposite party has failed to prove on record that the complainant has consumed 40235 units for the disputed period for 774 days. However, the complainant has already made the payment of minimum charges to the opposite party vide receipt C-5. By issuing the bill Ex. C-4 for such a heavy amount to the complainant amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.

8         In light of the above discussion, the complaint succeeds and the same is hereby allowed in favour of the complainant and against the Opposite Party. The bill Ex. C-4 dated 10.5.2017 is hereby quashed.  The complainant has been harassed by the opposite party for a long time. The complainant is also entitled to Rs. 5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand only) as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony and Rs. 3,000/- (Rs. Three Thousand only) as litigation expenses from the opposite party. Opposite Party is directed to comply with the order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of order, failing which the complainant is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum, on the awarded amount, from the date of complaint till its realisation.  Copy of order will be supplied by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar to the parties as per rules. File be sent back to the District consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar.

Announced in Open Commission

04.05.2022

                                                                   Charanjit Singh

                                                                     President

                                                                                      NidhiVerma

                                                                                       Member