DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
PATIALA.
Consumer Complaint No.312 of 21.12.2015
Decided on: 25.1.2017
Jaswant Kaur aged about 70 years W/o latet Sh.Gamdour Singh, Resident of Gali No.2, Sangrur Road, Patran, Tehsil Patran District Patiala.
…………...Complainant
Versus
- Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. Patiala through its Managing Director.
- Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. Patran through its Executive Engineer.
- Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. Patran through its Sub Divisional Officer ( Suburban Patran).
…………Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Smt. Neena Sandhu, President
Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member
ARGUED BY:
Sh.B.S.Ghuman, Adv. counsel for the complainant.
Sh.H.S.Dhaliwal,Adv. counsel for Opposite Parties.
ORDER
SMT.NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT
Smt. Jaswant Kaur has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as the O.Ps.) praying for the following reliefs:-
- To set aside the illegal , excessive and arbitrary bill dated 08.11.2015 for the period from 5.9.2015 to 8.11.2015
- To pay Rs.30000/- as compensation for causing mental pain and agony.
2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that she is the holder of electricity connection bearing No.S.5CF610057X, issued by the O.Ps. The meter was installed three months back from dated 2.12.2014, by the O.Ps.in the multi pillar box, which is 200 meter away from her house. The meter began to run fast 2-3 days after 2.12.2014. One day the meter consumed 450 units and on the next day it consumed 1000 units. She requested the OPs regarding the fast running of the meter. Two officials of the OPs came to her house and asked about the problem. She explained about the fast running of the meter. At this they promised to change the meter. On 2.12.2014, the old meter was replaced with new meter. She received the bills of consumption regularly for the period from 5.5.2015 to 5.9.2015 and paid the same in time. But to her surprise the bill issued by the OPs for the period from 5.9.2015 to 8.11.2015, to the tune of Rs.70449/- is very excessive. She went to the office of OP no.1 and enquired about the same. The Ops said that the meter was tampered, so it is the theft case and she has to pay the bill amount. The Ops neither checked the meter in her presence nor sent any notice for the checking of the same. She requested the OPs for the correction of the impugned bill but the OPs did not listen her request and compelled to pay the bill immediately, failing which the connection shall be disconnected. Due to the adverse attitude of the OPs she is suffering from mental agony and physical harassment.
3. On being put to notice, the OPs appeared and filed the written version. It is admitted that the electricity connection bearing a/c No.S.5CF610057X was installed at the premises in the name of Sh.Gamdour Singh. It is also admitted that the old meter became defective due to which the same was replaced and new meter was installed on 2.12.2014 by JE Roop Singh. in the presence of the complainant The old meter was taken to the ME Lab for routine checking. The same was got checked in the ME Lab Sangrur on 15.1.2015 where it was found that the complainant was committing theft of energy by by-passing the meter having applied a wire from incoming phase of meter to the outgoing phase of meter. As such the meter was found tampered to stop the actual consumption of electricity. This fact was pointed out by the Audit Party of the OPs who calculated the amount to the tune of Rs.67,518/-according to LDHF formula. The same was explained to the complainant. There is no deficiency in service on their part. After denouncing all other averments made in the complaint, it was prayed to dismiss the complaint.
4. In support of her complaint, the ld. counsel for the complainant tendered in evidence, affidavit of the complainant, Ex.CA alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C4 and closed the evidence. The ld. counsel for the OPs tendered in evidence Ex.OPA, sworn affidavit of Sh.Sucha Singh,SDO, alongwith documents Exs.OP1 to OP8 and closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
6. The complainant has challenged the electricity bill dated 8.11.2015,Ex.C4 for the period from 5.9.2015 to 8.11.2015, for a sum of Rs.70,449/-, wherein an amount of Rs.67,518/-has been shown as sundry charges. The stand of the O.Ps is that the sundry charges to the tune of Rs.67,518/- has been charged on account of theft of electricity having committed by the complainant. The Ops have issued a notice dated 15.1.2015, Ex.OP3, against the offence committed under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The complainant was asked to pay an amount of Rs.67,518/-.The said amount has rightly been assessed as per LDH formula and the complainant is liable to pay the same. The complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable before this Forum.
Since this case is related to unauthorized use of electricity/theft case, this Forum has no jurisdiction to deal with the matter, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, in the case of U.P.Power Corporation Limited & Others Vs. Anis Ahmad decided on 1.7.2013. Consequently, we dismiss the complaint being not maintainable. Parties are left to bear their own cost. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach the appropriate court/authority for the redressal of her grievance. The said court/authority may condon the delay for the period for which the instant complaint remained pending before this Forum. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of cost under the rules. Thereafter file be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.
ANNOUNCED
DATED:25.1.2017
NEENA SANDHU
PRESIDENT
NEELAM GUPTA
MEMBER
