Punjab

Fatehgarh Sahib

RBT/CC/1289/2018

Abdul Majid - Complainant(s)

Versus

PSPCL - Opp.Party(s)

Manoj Kumar Rohilla

31 Oct 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, FATEHGARH SAHIB.

                                                                             RBT/CC/1289/2018

Complaint No. of 1289 of 2018

                                                                             Date of Institution:14.12.2018

                                                                             Date of Decision:31.10.2022    

Abdul Majid, Pir Baba Road, Parbhat Zirakpur, Mohali Punjab. 

                                                                                      …………....Complainant(s)                                                     

                                                Versus

PSPCL, Old MC Office, Zirakpur Mohali Punjab through Sub Division Officer.

 

       …………....Opposite Party(s)

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Quorum

Sh. Pushvinder Singh, President

Ms. Shivani Bhargava, Member

Sh. Manjit Singh Bhinder, Member

 

Present:Sh. Manoj Kumar Rohilay, Counsel for Complainant.

             Sh. Himanshu Bansal, Counsel for OP

 

Order By

Manjit Singh Bhinder, Member

1.                The present complaint has been filed by the complainant (hereinafter referred to as ‘CC’) against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as “OP”) with a prayer to direct the OP to correct their data and withdraw their illegal demand of Rs.15,339/-. CC also seeks a compensation to the tune of Rs.80,000/- for mental and physical harassment and also claimed Rs.15,000/- for litigation expenses.
2.                  The CC alleged that CC is subscriber of domestic electricity connection of OP and the CC had paid his all previous bills issued to him by the OP for the account No.Z74ZT692518W. No previous outstanding was pending against the CC. CC alleged that in the month of September a wrong bill of Rs.2350/- was sent by the OP to the CC. CC alleged that OP added already paid bill amount of the month of August in the month of September. After many personal visits by the CC, that bill was corrected by the OP.
3.                CC alleged that surprisingly the employee of OP informed the CC that there was one more outstanding bill of Rs.15,495/- pending against him for an other account and CC had to clear that pending outstanding of his other account otherwise his electricity connection can be disconnected. CC alleged that he had visited the office of OP to enquire about the matter and requested that he had never applied any other connection but employee of OP started misbehaving with CC and argued that there is one more account no. Z74ZR752518W which was running on his name on an other address and that outstanding of Rs.15,232/- was pending towards this account, which has to be paid by CC otherwise his electric connection could be disconnected. Complainant requested the OP that he never applied for any other connection at any other place and CC was using only a connection of account no. Z74ZT692518W on abovementioned address. But his all request went in vain. CC further alleged that  in the month of November, OP sent a bill of Rs.15,495/- including outstanding of Rs.15,339/- of the other account bill in his bill, but as stated earlier that other account has no relation with the CC. CC alleged that OP started forcing and threatened the CC to pay the wrong and illegal bill issued by them otherwise his connection would be disconnected. It is pertinent to mention here that the meter number of the CC was also wrong in his bill and CC also requested many time for correction of meter number in the bill. CC’s meter number was 4892813 but OP wrongly entered Meter No. 4992813 in the bill. He alleged that OP started giving lame excuse that it was a minor mistake and department will correct it as soon as possible. But the OP did not take any action on the request of CC. CC alleged that the said act of the OP tantamount to deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice causing financial loss and mental agony to the CC. Hence, the CC, who is the consumer of the OP come under the purview of Consumer Protection Act.
4.                  Notice of the complaint was issued to the OP and Sh. Himanshu Bansal, advocate,counsel for the OP appeared and filed written version/reply. OPs stated that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form as the connection is of domestic nature. OP stated that CC is having one more electricity connection on his name in some other premises and amount of Rs.15,495/- was pending for that connection. Further OP stated that when CC approached the officials of the department he was properly informed about the abovesaid outstanding amount and the CC had promised the officials to pay the said amount but instead of paying so the CC filed the present complaint. OP admitted the fact that due to some technical error the meter number of the CC was wrongly mentioned in the bill, which was afterwards corrected on the request of CC. OP stated that there is no deficiency on the part of the OP because OP was demanded actual and correct amount form the CC but CC wants to run away from his liability. OPs denied all other allegations and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
5.                  CC in his evidence has furnished his affidavit in support of the complaint and reiterating the facts contained in the complaint as Ex.C-1/A and he also produced the copies of bills as Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2, copy of screenshot of his previous payment as Ex.C-3, copy of written request as Ex.C-4, copy of November Bill as Ex.C-5, copy of another account bill as Ex.C-6, photo of meter installed at his house as Ex.C-7, RTI application as Ex.C-8. On the other hand OP produced the affidavit as Ex.OP-1, copies of consumption data as Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-3. Copy of letter of SDO/AE Commercial as Ex.OP-4. In the Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-3 the OP has submitted consumption data and bill amount of two number electric connections of Abdul Majid/CC.       
6.                  The District Commission, Mohali, while admitting the complaint of the CC on 16.01.2019 in its order restrained the OP from disconnecting the electricity connection of the CC subject to payment of 30% of the disputed amount i.e. Rs.4600/- within 15 days of the said order as well as subject to payment of future electricity consumption bills sams the disputed amount of Rs.15,495/-.  
7.              We have heard the counsels for the parties and have gone through the file carefully.
8.               During the course of argument, counsel for OP was asked to point out any other electric connection except the connection in question in the name of CC but he could not point out any other connection, however, on his request case was adjourned for the purpose of settlement/compromise. Thereafter counsel for OP stated that the OP is ready to waive off the amount in question i.e. Rs.15,232/- if the CC makes statement to withdraw the present complaint. The counsel for OP also produced a letter written by SDO/AEE Commercial, Zirkapur vide which it has been requested that the department is ready to waiving off the bill amount i.e. Rs.15,232/-. The counsel for CC requested that the OP issued wrong bill and made a false demand of Rs.15,232/- and as such CC was compel to filed present complaint. It was filed in January 2019 and since then the complaint is pending and the CC is attending the Court hearings. So, CC suffered mental and physical harassment and he also suffered economic loss as he has to engage counsel and also spent money for attending the Court hearings hearings. CC also suffered loss of his work on the dates when he attended the Court hearings. We also find that the OP has wrongly issued the bill demanding Rs.15,232/- and the OP has failed to point out any other connection in the name of CC as alleged by the OP as such the CC is entitled to compensation for physical and mental harassment and also for litigation expenses.
9.                 In view of the aforesaid discussions the complaint is allowed partly and OP is directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- for mental and physical harassment and also directed to pay Rs.5000/- for litigation expenses. In case the CC has already paid any amount out of the bill in question i.e. Rs.15,232/- as per order dated 16.01.2019 passed by this Commission then the said amount shall be adjusted in the future bills of CC. The compliance of this order be made by the OP within a period of 45 days on receipt of certified copy of this order. Copy of this order be provided to the CC and the OPs as per rules. This complaint could not be decided within a specific period as provided by the statute due to rush of work and large pendency.  File be returned back to the District Consumer Commission, Mohali for consignment.

     Pronounced:-

     31.10.2022                                                                     (Pushvinder Singh)

                                                                                 President

 

 

      (Manjit Singh Bhinder)

                                                                                                      Member

       

       

                                                                              (Shivani Bhargava)

   Member