Punjab

Faridkot

CC/20/185

Atul Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

PSPCL - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

30 Mar 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

                                                    Complaint No :         185 of 2020

Date of Institution :    03.12.2020

Date of Decision :      30.03.2022

Atul Gupta aged about 51 years s/o Sh Madan Gopal Gupta r/o House No. 364, Street No. 8-L, Dogar Basti, Faridkot, Tehsil and District Faridkot.

                                                             ...Complainant

Versus

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman cum Managing Director, The Mall, Patiala.
2. Assistant Executive Engineer  Sub Urban Sub Division, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. Opposite Dashmesh Public School, Talwandi Road, Faridkot, Tehsil and District Faridkot.

   .........Ops

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

(Now, Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019)

 

Quorum:  Smt. Param Pal Kaur, Member,

                 Sh Vishav Kant Garg, Member.

 

Present: Sh Atul Gupta/ Complainant in person,

    Sh Rajneesh Garg, Ld Counsel for OPs.

 

cc  no. 185 of 2020

 

ORDER

(Param Pal Kaur, Member)

                                               Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd etc/Ops seeking directions to Ops to withdraw the notice dt 12.11.2020 for  Rs.14,376/- and for further directing them to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by complainant besides Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses to complainant.

2                                           Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he is using domestic electric connection bearing a/c no. 3003348324  running in his name and he has been paying all the bills regularly as and when received and nothing is due towards him. It is submitted that earlier meter of complainant was single phase, but thereafter, complainant got installed three phase meter through OPs. Meter in question is installed outside his  premises in a sealed meter cub board and complainant has no access to that and its reading is being recorded regularly by OPs. Further submitted that during the

cc  no. 185 of 2020

period of lockdown, employees of PSPCL came to his residence to check the meter and on finding it intact, they called out the Meter Reader and also talked with RA. And thereafter, they negligently raised inflated bill for 3000 units. Complainant moved an application to Ex Er Sub Urban and thereafter, on thorough checking, OPs sent corrected bill for Rs.18,370/-which was duly paid by complainant. In Nov. 2020 OPs sent him a notice no. 2231 dated 12.11.2020 for Rs.14,376/- on the basis of objection raised by Audit Party for alleged burnt meter for the period from 13.09.2018 to 17.01.2019. On receiving the same, complainant immediately approached OPs and requested them to withdraw the said notice, but instead of listening to his genuine requests, OPs refused to withdraw the same and even threatened him to disconnect his electric connection, if he fails to pay the entire amount. It is further submitted that notice issued by OPs is quite illegal as meter of complainant was never burnt and no notice or letter in this regard was ever served to him by OPs. Even OPs did not send him any notice before sending the meter of complainant in M E Lab for the purpose of checking. No  checking report was ever supplied to him. Act of OPs in issuing illegal notice and their refusal

cc  no. 185 of 2020

to withdraw the same despite repeated requests, amounts to deficiency in service and it has caused huge harassment and mental agony to him. He has prayed for directions to OPs to withdraw the impugned notice and has also prayed for compensation and litigation expenses. Hence, the instant complaint.

3                                              Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dt 09.12.2020, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.

4                                           On receipt of the notice, the opposite parties filed written statement wherein they have denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being incorrect and wrong and asserted that removed meter of the complainant was sent to M E Lab for checking where it was found to be burnt. Therefore, account of the complainant was overhauled for the period from 13.08.2018 to 17.01.2019 and notice in question was sent to complainant. It is admitted that they sent the notice in question to complainant and also called upon him to deposit the amount raised therein. During

cc  no. 185 of 2020

checking in M E Lab, meter was found burnt and this  amount is raised by Audit Party and there is no question to withdraw the same. Complainant is liable to pay the same. All the other allegations and the allegation with regard to relief sought too are refuted with prayer to dismiss the complaint with costs.

5                                                Parties were given proper opportunities        to produce evidence to prove their respective case. Complainant tendered in evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to 4 and closed the same.

6                                                In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, ld counsel for OPs tendered in evidence affidavit of Balwinder Singh, S.D.O., PSPCL, Faridkot Ex OP-1, documents Ex OP-2 to OP-3 and closed the evidence.

7                                            We have heard the ld counsel for complainant as well OPs and have carefully perused the record available on file.

 

cc  no. 185 of 2020

8                                                         From the careful perusal of record and pleadings advance by parties, it is observed that case of the complainant is that huge inflated demand is raised by OPs for the period from 13.09.2018 to 17.01.2019 through demand notice dated 12.11.2020 on the ground that his meter was burnt. Contention raised by complainant is that no checking report was ever given to him. Moreover, before testing the meter of complainant in M E Lab, no prior notice regarding testing of meter was sent to him and even checking was not done in his presence. On the other hand, Ops stressed mainly on the point that removed meter of the complainant was sent to M E Lab, where after checking, it was found burnt. After overhauling his account for the period from 13.08.2018 to 17.01.2019 said notice was sent to complainant, (though in said demand notice dated 12.11.2020, period for overhauling the account is mentioned as 13.09.2018 to 17.01.2019). Amount is raised after audit objections and there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs.

9                          From the record, it is clear that complainant has cleared all the bills. It is observed that Opposite parties have not

 

cc  no. 185 of 2020

produced on record any evidence to show that the electric meter of the complainant was removed, packed and sealed in the presence and under signatures of the complainant or his representative and the electric meter was never checked in the M.E. Lab in the presence of the complainant or his representative. Therefore, it is crystal clear that no procedure has been adopted by the opposite parties as per Rules and Regulations of the P.S.P.C.L. regarding removing, packing, sealing and checking of the electric meter in the M.E. Lab and thereafter raising the demand arising out of the said checking, if any.

10                                        Further as per regulations of Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd : In case of testing of a meter removed from the consumer premises in the Licensee’s laboratory, the consumer would be informed of the proposed date of testing atleast seven days in advance. The signature of the consumer, or his authorized representative, if present would be obtained on the Test Result Sheet and a copy thereof is required to be supplied to consumer. In this way, Opposite Parties did not act as per provisions contained in the electricity Act and it is deficiency in service. Consumer can ask the service provider to give him the details  on the basis of which the

cc  no. 185 of 2020

demand is made, which is not available in the present case.  Further as per their own regulations and instructions, OPs cannot charge any amount on  the basis of any checking regarding which no intimation or prior notice was ever sent to complainant. Ops have been miserably failed to place on record any document to prove the fact that they ever issued any notice or intimation letter to complainant before testing the meter in M E Lab.

11                        In the light of above discussion, arguments advanced by ld counsel for complainant and opposite parties and from the perusal of documents and evidence produced on record by respective parties, we are fully convinced with the pleadings of complainant. He has succeeded in proving his case and therefore, complaint in hand is hereby allowed. OPs are directed to withdraw the demand of Rs.14,376/- raised by them vide  impugned notice dated 12.11.2020 and are further directed to pay Rs.3,000/- to complainant as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him alongwith Rs.2,000/-as litigation expenses incurred on present complaint. Compliance of this order be made within one month of receipt of this order failing which, complainant shall be

cc  no. 185 of 2020

entitled to initiate proceedings under Section 71 and 72 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 30.03.2022

(Vishav Kant Garg)       (Param Pal Kaur)                        

Member                          Member

 

 

cc  no. 185 of 2020

Atul Gupta   Vs   PSPCL

 

Present: Sh Atul Gupta/ Complainant in person,

    Sh Rajneesh Garg, Ld Counsel for OPs.

              Arguments heard. Vide our separate detailed order of even date, complaint in hand is hereby allowed. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law. File be consigned to record room.

Announced on

Dated : 30.03.2022

(Vishav Kant Garg)       (Param Pal Kaur)                         

Member                          Member