DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA.
CC.No.314 of 04-07-2012
Decided on 11-01-2013
Mahesh Kumar, aged about 54 years s/o Lachhman Dass r/o H.No.332758, St. No.3, Paras Ram Nagar, Bathinda.
........Complainant
Versus
1.Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall, Patiala, through its Managing Director-cum-Chairman.
2.AEE/SDO Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Sub Division Suburban, Bathinda.
.......Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.
Sh.Amarjeet Paul, Member.
Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member.
Present:-
For the Complainant: Sh.H.S Sidhu, counsel for complainant.
For Opposite parties: Sh.J.D Nayyar, counsel for opposite parties.
ORDER
VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is holding an electricity connection bearing No.B14PF620342 in his premises. In the 2nd-3rd week of March 2012 the opposite parties have affixed the meter of the complainant in a joint box which is fixed in the street. There are 20 meters affixed in the joint box of the different persons. On 17.6.2012 the light of one of the neighbour of the complainant went out of order, the neighbour has lodged the complaint of the same with the complaint centre of the opposite parties. The said complaint was attended by one Bhagwan Dass and one another person and on checking it was found that the load of account No.......332 was connected with the meter of the complainant and his load was connected with the meter of one Pritam Singh who is the resident of the house No.32759, the said electricity connection number belongs to one Joginder Singh Lakhesar of H.No.32749. The complainant further alleged that the account number may be B14 PF 620332 of Joginder Singh. At the time of checking the official of the opposite parties namely Bhagwan Dass has made a report to the extent that the wires of the meter No......332 (17060 units consumption shown on the said meter at the time of changing of the wires of the abovesaid meters) were connected with the meter No.620342(8665 units consumption shown on the said meter at the time of changing of the wires of the abovesaid meters). The official of the opposite parties has wrongly written the electricity connection No.620342 actually the electricity connection number was .....332. The complainant has moved an application dated 18.6.2012 to the opposite party No.2 and requested him to look into the matter and make the adjustment in his account. The opposite party No.2 directed the complainant to give the application to the dispatch clerk and then the same was received by their dispatch/diary clerk but they did not bother to his request. In the last week of the June 2012, the complainant has received the bill No.96904 dated 19.6.2012 issued by the opposite parties. The complainant was shocked to see that the bill was charged on the same consumption and no adjustment was done. The complainant again met with the opposite party No.2 and requested him to make the adjustment in the present bill as well as in his account upto the consumption 8665 units as the electricity is not consumed by him as the same was consumed by some other consumer i.e. Joginder Singh Lakhesar but they flatly refused to accede to his request and conveyed him that it is just a mistake done on the part of the contractor who has placed the meters in the joint box. Pritam Singh has also moved an application dated 20.6.2012 to the opposite party No.2 in which he has alleged that the wires of the complainant were connected with his meter. The complainant has challenged the bill No.96904 dated 19.6.2012 on the various grounds and has filed the present complaint to seek the directions to the opposite parties to correct the bill shown in the bill of Pritam Singh of house No.32759 and to waive off the next bill upto the consumption of 8665 as the consumption of the electricity has not used by him alongwith cost and compensation.
2. Notice was sent to the opposite parties. The opposite parties after appearing before this Forum have filed their joint written statement and pleaded that the complainant has concocted a false story regarding the exchange of the wires of the meter to avoid the payment of the bill amount. The application received from the complainant was given due consideration and on checking it was found that the loads of the respective consumers were rightly connected to their own meters not to the meter of some other person as has been alleged by him. There is no negligence regarding the wiring of the meter. No assurance was given by any of the official of the opposite parties to the complainant. The meters were found to be connected rightly. No report has been made by the J.E. The bill has been issued as per the electricity consumed by the complainant and he is liable to make the payment of the same. The meters had been rightly connected to the respective loads of the different electricity connection holders, they had been duly informed on the spot. There was no need to issue the MCO since this was not a case of changing the meter but only installing all the meters in the box. The bill pertains to the electricity consumed by the complainant. Moreover the said bill was legally recoverable as such no correction could be done in the same. The electricity is being used for the commercial purpose.
3. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.
4. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.
5. The contention of the complainant is that in the 2nd-3rd week of March 2012 the opposite parties have shifted the meter of almost 20 persons in a joint meter box. On dated 17.6.2012 when the light of one of the neighbour of the complainant went out of order, the neighbour has lodged the complaint of the same with the opposite parties. The complaint was attended by one Bhagwan Dass and one another person and on checking it was found that the load of account No.......332 was connected with the meter of the complainant and his load was connected with the meter of one Pritam Singh who is the resident of the house No.32759. The complainant further submitted that he has written the account No.....332 in short as this account number belongs to one Joginder Singh Lakhesar of H.No.32749 and has given the account number of Joginder Singh Lakhesar as B14 PF 620332. The complainant further submitted that at the time of checking the official of the opposite parties namely Bhagwan Dass has made a report to the extent that the wires of the meter No......332 were connected with the meter No.620342 at the time of affixing the meters in the joint meter box. On 18.6.2012 the complainant has moved an application to the opposite party No.2 and requested him to look into the matter and make the adjustment in his account but they did not pay any heed to his request. In the last week of June 2012, the complainant has received the bill No.96904 dated 19.6.2012 issued by the opposite parties for the same consumption and no adjustment was done in the same by them. The complainant again approached the opposite party No.2 and requested him to make the adjustment in the said bill as well as in his account upto the consumption 8665 units as he has not consumed the electricity rather it has been used by some other consumer i.e. Joginder Singh Lakhesar. Pritam Singh has also moved an application dated 20.6.2012 to the opposite party No.2 in which he has alleged that the wires of the complainant were connected with his meter.
6. The opposite parties on the other hand submitted that the loads of the respective consumers are connected to their own meters. The complainant has concocted a false story. The application received from the complainant was given due consideration and on checking it was found that the load of the respective consumers were rightly connected to their own meters not to the meter of some other person as submitted by him. The meters have rightly been installed as per the rules. No assurance was given by any of the official of the opposite parties to the complainant. The meters were found to be connected rightly. No report has been made by the J.E.
7. The complainant has placed on file Ex.C2 dated 17.6.2012 in which the meter number has been written and it has been signed by one Bhagwan Dass. This is the mere slip if this is the report, the meter No.332 in full should have been mentioned as the J.E of the opposite parties is the authorized person to check the account number of any of the consumer but this shows that the slip has been prepared to create the evidence, hence it is not an authentic document to rely upon. Angrej Kaur wd/o Binder Singh r/o H.No.32747 has given an affidavit Ex.C5 in support of the complainant. She has specifically deposed in para No.2 of her affidavit Ex.C5:-
“2)That when on dated 17.6.2012 the two employees of the complaint center of the PSPCL came to attend a complaint then it was found that in the meter of Sh.Pritam Singh (House No.32759) the wires of the connection of Sh.Mahesh Kumar (H.No.32758) were connected and in the meter of Sh.Mahesh Kumar of H.No.32758 the wires of Sh.Joginder Singh Lakheshar (H.No.32749) were connected.”
In this para Angrej Kaur has failed to mention the names of the persons who have visited the spot to correct the wires of the meter. Angrej Kaur, Santosh Kumari and Pritam Singh have deposed in their respective affidavits that 'the report on the back of the payment receipt was also made by those employees who have corrected the connections' but again they have failed to mention the names of the persons who were present at the spot whether they were employees of the Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. or some private persons.
Moreover Bhagwan Dass, J.E, PSPCL has deposed in the para No.1 of his affidavit Ex.R2:-
“That the deponent had never changed the connection of the meter as has been alleged by the complainant. The deponent had also never report as alleged by the complainant.”
8. During the arguments the opposite parties were directed to place on file the consumption data of all the three persons that has been given by the opposite parties vide Annexure R1, consumption data of Mahesh Kumar account bearing No.B14 PF62/342; Annexure R2 Kuldeep Singh account bearing No.B14 PF62/332 and Annexure R2 Pritam Singh account bearing No.B14 PF62/343 as the electricity connection account number of Joginder Singh Lakhesar has not been mentioned by the complainant as such the connection data of Joginder Singh Lakhesar is not called. The account No.332 belongs to one Kuldeep Singh that has been duly placed on file
A perusal of the said consumption data of all the 3 persons shows that they are using their electricity as per their consumption as the consumption data is for the last 2 years. Moreover the complainant has failed to prove his allegations against the opposite parties with cogent and convincing evidence.
9. Thus from the facts, circumstances and evidence placed on file, this complaint fails and is hereby dismissed without any order as to cost.
10. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced in open Forum:-
11-01-2013
Vikramjit Kaur Soni
President
Amarjeet Paul
Member
Sukhwinder Kaur
Member
