Punjab

Nawanshahr

CC/43/2019

Karam Chand - Complainant(s)

Versus

PSPCL - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

29 Aug 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES   REDRESSAL FORUM, SHAHEED BHAGAT SINGH NAGAR

 

Consumer Complaint No.   43 of 15.06.2019

              Date of Decision            :   29.08.2019

         

Karam Chand aged 80 years, resident of Village & Post Office Saroya, Tehsil Balachaur, District S.B.S Nagar.

….. Complainant

Versus

 

1.       Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Sub Division Office Saroya, Tehsil Balachaur, District S.B.S Nagar through SDO

2.       Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Garshankar, District Hoshiarpur through Senior Executive Engineer Garshankar.

3.       Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Nawanshahr, Tehsil Nawanshahr District S.B.S Nagar.

…Opposite parties

 

(Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

 

QUORUM:

 

SH.KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

SH.KANWALJEET SINGH, MEMBER

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

 

For complainant              :         Complainant in person.

For OPs                         :         Sh. P.K Dhir, Advocate

 

Per KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

 

1.                 The complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the OPs on the averments that a domestic electricity connection bearing no.N26NK120055Y issued by OPs with load of 2.600 KW. He paid the bill of Rs.1500-1600 as per his actual consumption. On 28.02.2019, a bill of Rs.14160/- was issued to him by OPs, in which consumption was showing 15850 to 17571 and total unit 1721 was shown in this bill, which is illegal due to defective meter. But the complainant has not consumed excess consumption. He paid Rs.120/- as meter challenge fee, vide book no. 87505 receipt no.412 dated 06.03.2019. He also paid bill amount of Rs.1350/-, vide receipt no.372 dated 06.03.2019 as per demand of OPs. On 08.05.2019 a bill of Rs.14900/- issued by OPs to him. He approached OPs for rectification of this bill but of no use. He alleged that OPs issued wrong bill to him, which is illegal due to defective meter. He suffered lot of mental tension due to this act and conduct of OPs. He alleged that he has not consumed the excess electricity. He consumed electricity as per actual consumption consumed by him. It is also pertinent to mention here that meter was not sealed by employees of OPs and no paper was signed by complainant for his presence. Due to above said act and conduct of OPs, he filed the present complaint and prayed that OPs be directed to issue fresh bill as per actual consumption consumed by him. He also prayed for Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental harassment.

2.                 Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed written reply and contested the complaint of the complainant by raising preliminary objections  that complaint is not maintainable and complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint. No cause of action has arisen to file the present complaint against OPs. On merits, it was averred that the OP no.1 issued electricity bill of Rs.14,900/- to complainant as per computer invoice and said bill was adjusted till disputed bill is not clear. On 06.04.2019 complainant gave an application to OP no.1 for changed the meter. On the same date, OP no.1 change of the meter vide MCO no.161/002, which was affected on 07.03.2019. The complainant put up his thumb impression on MCO and he also gave consent to OP no.1 that meter be sent to Goraya and he has no time to go ME. Lab so meter be opened and checked in his absence and during checking of meter in ME Lab , he will  accept the result of ME Lab and he has put up his thumb impression on the consent letter. On 03.05.2019 meter was checked in ME Lab Goraya and as per ME Lab report meter is correct and working properly. After receiving ME Lab report Goroya complainant was called by OP no.1 and asked him to put up his case before DSC at Garshankar but he did not put up his case in DSC (Dispute Settlement Committee).A  bill of Rs.14610/- was issued to him as per result of ME Lab Goraya. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by OPs and they prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.                 The complainant has tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.CW-1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-6 and closed the evidence. As against; OPs tendered in evidence affidavit of Er.Sukhjit Singh AEE as Ex.OP-A along with copies of documents Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-5 and closed the evidence.

4.                 We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case.

5.                 Evidence on the record has been examined by us with the able assistance of counsel for the parties. The complainant deposed his deposition contained in his affidavit Ex.CW-1 on the record. He deposed that OPs wrongly issued bill dated 28.02.2019 of Rs.14610/- to him. He also alleged that this bill issued to him without his consumption. He approached OPs for rectification of this bill but of no use. He further alleged that due to this illegal act of OPs, he suffered great mental harassment.  Ex.C-1 is aadhar card of the complainant. Ex.C-2 is bill dated 05.01.2019 for payment of Rs.1250/- . Ex.C-3 is bill for payment of Rs.130/-. Ex.C-4 is receipt no.412 dated 06.03.2019 for payment of Rs.120/- regarding challenging meter fee. Ex.C-5 is receipt thereof. Ex.C-6 is electricity bill dated 08.05.2019 for payment of Rs.14,900/-.

6.                 To counter this evidence of complainant, OPs relied upon affidavit of Er.Sukhjit Singh AEE Sub Division PSPCL Saroya District SBS Nagar as Ex.OP-A. This witness stated that OPs issued bill of Rs.14,900/- to complainant as per compute invoice. On 06.03.2019 complainant gave an application to OP no.1 for change of the meter. On the same day, OPs changed meter, vide MCO no. 161/002, which was affected on 07.03.2019. The complainant gave consent to OPno.1 that his meter be sent to Goraya and he has no time to go to ME Lab, therefore, meter be opened and checked in his absence and during checking of meter in ME Lab, he will accept the result of ME Lab. Meter was checked on 03.05.2019 in ME Lab Goraya and as per ME Lab report, meter is correct and working properly. He denied any deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Ex.OP-1 is copy of consumption data of complainant. Ex.OP-2 is copy of MCO along with report of JE. Ex.OP-3 is copy of consent letter. Ex.OP-4 is copy of ME Lab report. Ex.OP-5 is challan no.127 dated 03.05.2019.

7.                 From perusal of entire evidence on the record and hearing respective pleadings of the parties, we find that it is an established fact that a domestic electricity connection issued to complainant and OPs issued electricity bills to complainant from time to time and complainant deposited the bills issued to him regularly. As per document Ex.OP-1 the complainant consumed below noted electricity consumption of units :-

 

Sr.No.	Month wise	Units
1.	01/2017	79
2.	03/2017	71
3.	05/2017	141
4.	07/2017	389
5.	09/2017	345
6.	11/2017	181
7.	01/2018	057
8.	03/2018	056
9.	06/2018	177
10.	07/2018	217
11.	08/2018	272
12	11/2018	166
13	01/2019	188
14.	03/2019	1721
15.	05/2019	185

 

In the above document Ex.OP-1 on 28.02.2019 OPs shows consumption of unit as 1721, which is illegal and the same is based on the wrong reading taken by employees of OPs. From 01/2017 to 01/2019 the reading taken by employees of OPs less than of 1721 unit, then how the same is increased suddenly, this shows something wrong on the part of OPs.

8.                 OPs pleaded in their written statement that electricity bill was sent to complainant as per consumption of the complainant. OPs further pleaded that the electricity bill of Rs.14,900/- was issued as per computer invoice. Therefore, in the pleadings of the OPs, there are some contradictory view taken by them. First of all they stated in their written reply that the bill of Rs.14,900/- issued to complainant as per consumption and secondly they stated that the bill of Rs.14,900/- was issued to complainant as per computer invoice. On  06.03.2019 complainant gave application to OPs for change of the meter. On the same date OPs changed the meter vide MCO No.161/002, which was affected on 07.03.2019, but OPs have not taken the consent of the complainant. Meter sent to Goraya for checking and the same was opened and checked in the absence of complainant, which is against the rules of PSPECL & Electricity Supply Instruction Manual. The presence of complainant is necessary when meter checked and opened. OPs also packed and sealed the meter in the absence of complainant.  

9.                 In view of above facts and circumstances of the case, we allow the complaint of the complainant and    OPs are directed to issue fresh bills to the complainant after taking average consumption of the last year of the same months. The complainant is also entitled to Rs.1000/- as compensation for mental tension and harassment and Rs.500/- as cost of litigation.

10.               The compliance of above said be made by the OPs within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt copy of this order.   

11.               Let copies of the order be sent to the parties, as permissible, under the rules.

 

Dated: 29.08.2019

 

                              (Kanwajeet Singh)                 (Kuljit Singh)

                                      Member                         President