Punjab

Nawanshahr

CC/103/2016

Hardeep Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

PSPCL - Opp.Party(s)

MP Nayyar, Sukhwinder Kaur

19 Mar 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SHAHEED BHAGAT SINGH NAGAR. 

 

Consumer Complaint No    :    103 of 2016

Date of Institution                         :    08.11.2016                    

Date of Decision                 :   19.03.2018

 

Hardeep Kaur wife of Sh.Jatinder Singh through her husband Jatinder Singh C/o Flame Take Away Chicken Shop, Rahon Road, Nawanshahr, District Nawanshahr.

                                                          ….Complainant

Versus

  1. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Garhshankar Road Nawanshahr through Sub Divisional Officer.
  2. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Garhshankar Road Nawanshahr through XEN.
  3. Head Office, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Mall Road, Patiala through Chairman. 

Opposite parties

Complaint under the Provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM:         

S.A.P.S. RAJPUT, PRESIDENT

S.KANWALJEET SINGH, MEMBER

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

For Complainant           :         Sh.M.P. Nayyar, Advocate

For OPs                         :         Sh. P.K Dhir, Advocate

 

ORDER 

PER S.KANWALJEET SINGH, MEMBER

  1. This complaint filed by complainants under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  Further, it is averred that complainant is permanent resident of aforesaid address and running chicken shop for livelihood.  Complainant is permanent consumer of OPs vide account No.3003205443.  On 23.10.2016, the OP No.1 has sent electric bill for Rs.64680/- is too much excessive from actual consumption which is due to technical fault and jumping of meter and the said bill Rs.40,000/- added illegally.  The OPs have not supplied the detailed of the same nor issued any notice.  We are paying regular bill and there is no outstanding towards us.  As the electric meter was installed at out of shop and there is no question of tempering or theft of electric supply.  The said meter was installed in October 2015.  In winter out electric consumption about Rs.5,000/- to Rs.6,000/- and in summer season the electric consumption is about Rs.10,000/- to Rs.12,000/-.  That against bill dated 23.10.2016, I have submitted a application dated 24.10.2016 to OP No.1 and on proceeding on said meter, J.E. has seen the mater and found that meter was burnt and was jumped but after burning of the same there uninterrupted electric supply is running.  Then J.E. has submitted report that Incoming and outgoing of neutral meter block was melted and meter required to be changed.  Seal of the meter is OK.  On asking the reasons from J.E. about burning of meter and excessive bill, he disclosed that it was due to over electric supply, the meter was burnt and jumped.  Thereafter, I approached the OPs for solution of excessive bill but they asked to deposited the said bill otherwise meter required to be disconnected, hence this complaint.  The detail of previous consumption of complainant is as under:-

Bill Date

  •  
  •  

Total Bill

Meter Status

Bill Type

Last year balance/sundry charges

 

  •  
  •  

 

 

 

 

 

  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  

0 Not deposited for non-issuance of bill

  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  

12080 deposited amount is Rs.20750

  1.  

Bill not issued by OPs

  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  
  1.  

0 Excessive bill of Rs.40000 sent

That OPs have not supplied the bill in time and sent the total bill for four months and also mentioned the reading of 2161 which old one but I have already paid full amount till 3233 units.OP No.1 has asked to deposit the said bill failing which connection will be removed, hence this complaint. Lastly prayer has been made that charges of bill dated 23.10.2016 amounting Rs.40000/- be set aside and charged average bill as per previous years average and claimed bill of 2-2 months and bill amount be taken in installments.It is further prayed that OPs be directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.30,000/- for mental and financial loss and Rs.30,000/- as litigation expenses.

  1. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs and  accordingly OPs appeared through counsel and filed written statement and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that this complaint is not maintainable.  Complainant has no locus standi.  This Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide the case.  No cause of action has been arisen to complainant.  On merits, it is admitted that complaint is consumer under NRS (Commercial Category).  It is submitted that OPs sent the bill to consumer/complainant according to actual consumption in current bill, the meter is yet to be sent in M.E. Lab Goraya, the meter was not challenge by the consumer and the meter was removed on 26.10.2016 in the presence of complainant vide MCO No.100002742548 and meter was replaced on same day.  Now the OP No.5 will sent the meter to M.E. Lab on priority basis and after that it will be clear but is the reason of excessive bill of the consumption of the complainant.  At the present time is shows that this is the consumption bill of complainant.  It is also admitted that meter was burnt as per report dated 25.10.2016 of J.E. but the meter was not jumped out and the reading of meter KWH 11233 KVAH12600 and connected load of consumer is 7.466 under NRS Category and 3 phase meter is installed at the premises of complainant but meter was changed on 26.10.2016 due to melt/burn of meter.  The OPs will be accepted the report of ME Lab and will do the decision as per ME Lab Goraya.  Rest of the averments have been denied by OPs and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.
  2. In order to prove complaint, counsel for the complainant, tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant – Hardip Kaur Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents i.e. Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-12 and closed the evidence in affirmative.
  3. In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, counsel for OPs tendered into evidence, affidavit of Niranjan Singh, AAE Ex.OPA alongwith documents Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-4 and then tendered one document Ex.OP-5 and then closed the evidence.
  4. We have heard counsel for the parties and also gone through the case file very carefully.

 

 

  1. Learned counsel for complainant has contended that on 23.10.2016, the OP No.1 has sent electric bill for Rs.64680/- is too much excessive from actual consumption which is due to technical fault and jumping of meter and the said bill Rs.40,000/- added illegally. That against bill dated 23.10.2016, I have submitted a application dated 24.10.2016 to OP No.1 and on proceeding on said meter, J.E. has seen the mater and found that meter was burnt and was jumped but after burning of the same there uninterrupted electric supply is running.  Then J.E. has submitted report that Incoming and outgoing of neutral meter block was melted and meter required to be changed.  Seal of the meter is OK.  On asking the reasons from J.E. about burning of meter and excessive bill, he disclosed that it was due to over electric supply, the meter was burnt and jumped.  Thereafter, I approached the OPs for solution of excessive bill but they asked to deposited the said bill otherwise meter required to be disconnected. That OPs have not supplied the bill in time and sent the total bill for four months and also mentioned the reading of 2161 which old one but I have already paid full amount till 3233 units.   Lastly prayer has been made that charges of bill dated 23.10.2016 amounting Rs.40000/- be set aside and charged average bill as per previous years average and claimed bill of 2-2 months and bill amount be taken in installments.
  2. On the other hand, learned counsel for OPs has argued that it is admitted that complaint is consumer under NRS (Commercial Category).  It is submitted that OPs sent the bill to consumer/complainant according to actual consumption in current bill, the meter is yet to be sent in M.E. Lab Goraya, the meter was not challenge by the consumer and the meter was removed on 26.10.2016 in the presence of complainant vide MCO No.100002742548 and meter was replaced on same day.  It is also argued that meter was burnt as per report dated 25.10.2016 of J.E. but the meter was not jumped out and the reading of meter KWH 11233 KVAH12600 and connected load of consumer is 7.466 under NRS Category and 3 phase meter is installed at the premises of complainant but meter was changed on 26.10.2016 due to melt/burn of meter.
  3. Under Para No.10 of the complaint, the complainant herself has admitted that she deposited the payment of bill upto 3233 Units.  Ex.C-1 bill dated 28.06.2016 also support the version of complainant as per Para No.10 of the complaint.  Ex.C-10 bill dated 23.10.2016 shows the previous reading 2161, current 11178, consumption of units 9017.
  4. We find that bill dated 28.06.2016, Ex.C-1 Unit status was 3233 and Ex.C-10 bill dated 23.10.2016 previous units status is 2161 which is wrong mentioned.  Both bill Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-10 are issued by OPs infact bill dated 23.10.2016 Ex.C-10 should be mentioned 3233 previous units.  So before the eye of law, the consumption units 11178 minus 3233 should be 7945 units not 9017 unit.  OPs are liable to adjust 1072 units out of total units 11178 bill dated 23.10.2016.  In the light of Ex.C-1 bill dated 28.06.2016 between Ex.C-10 bill dated 23.10.2016 neither bill issued by OPs nor produced by complainant on record file. Ex.OP-5 which shows the previous reading for the month June was 2161.  In the month of August the old reading was 3233.  In October, the old reading was again 2161.  As such, OPs have failed to mention the actual consumption of complainant, which is required to increased order instead of decreased order.  During arguments, learned counsel for OPs has presented some bills which have not been produced on record in evidence nor exhibited the same.  Hence the same cannot be relied upon.     
  5. Resultantly, in view of our above discussions, the present complaint filed by complainant is partly allowed and OPs are directed to recover the bill amount of disputed bill i.e. 23.10.2016 in two installments after deducting 1072 units out of 11178 units.  OPs are further directed to pay Rs.1,000/- as compensation and Rs.1,000/- as litigation expenses.   The above said entire compliance be made by the OPs within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order
  6. Complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
  7. Copies of the order be sent to the parties, as permissible, under the rules.
  8. File be indexed and consigned to record. 

Dated 19.03.2018                                                         

 

 

(Kanwaljeet Singh)                (A.P.S. Rajput)

Member                                  President

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.