Punjab

Faridkot

CC/19/87

Mahesh Pal - Complainant(s)

Versus

PSPCL - Opp.Party(s)

Ranjit Singh

10 Dec 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

                                                    Complaint No :           87 of 2019

Date of Institution :        25.03.2019

Date of Decision :           10.12.2019

Mahesh Pal aged about 31 years s/o Bihari Lal r/o Harindra Nagar, Street No.6, Opposite Sadar Police Station, 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 DS Sub Urban Sub Division, PSPCL,  Faridkot Tehsil and District Faridkot.

                                            .........Ops

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum: Sh Ajit Aggarwal, President,

              Smt Param Pal Kaur, Member.

 

Present: Sh Ranjit Singh, Ld Counsel for complainant,

    Sh Rajneesh Garg, Ld Counsel for OPs.

 

ORDER

(Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                           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

cc no.-87 of 2019

withdraw the bills dated 19.11.2018, 23.01.2019 and bill dated 17.03.2019 and for further directing them to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by complainant besides Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses to complainant.

2                                     Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he is having domestic electric connection bearing a/c no. 3000388031 in his name with sanctioned load of 0.83 KW and he has been paying all the bills as and when received and nothing is due towards him on account of consumption charges. Meter of complainant was changed in October 2017. It is submitted that complainant received bill dated 19.11.2018 for Rs.14,230/-for 1701 units which was very excessive. On receiving the same, complainant approached OPs and requested them to correct the bill. OPs assured to correct the same, but did not do anything needful. He further received bill dated 23.01.2019 for Rs.19,030/-for 2249 units which was also very excessive. Complainant again approached OPs and requested them to correct the bill and on request of complainant, JE of OPs checked the meter of complainant and changed his meter in February, 2019. Meter of complainant not changed and checked in his presence. Complainant again received bill dated 17.03.2019 for Rs.46,992/-for 3407 units, which was very excessive. Complainant approached Ops and requested them to withdraw or correct the said bill, but Ops failed to pay heed to his genuine request and threatened him to disconnect his connection, if he fails to deposit the entire amount in time, which amounts

cc no.-87 of 2019

to deficiency in service and trade mal practice. Complainant made several requests to Ops to withdraw the demand for excessive charges raised vide bills dated 19.11.2018, 23.01.2019 and bill dated 17.03.2019, but they refused to accede to his requests and this act and conduct of Ops has caused great inconvenience, harassment and mental tension to complainant for which he has prayed for seeking directions to OPs to set aside the demand raised through these bills and for further directing them to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by complainant besides Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses to complainant. Hence, this complaint.

3                                       Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dt 27.03.2019, 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 taking preliminary objections that they have constituted various Dispute Settlement Committees to settle the disputes between the parties, but complainant has not put his case before any such committee and therefore, complaint is liable to be dismissed and is not maintainable and moreover, complainant does not fall under the definition of consumer and even complaint filed by complainant is time barred and this Forum has no jurisdiction to hear and try the same. However, on merits, OPs have denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being wrong and

cc no.-87 of 2019

incorrect and asserted that correct bills were issued to complainant and there is no need to correct the same. Complainant has levelled false allegations. It is averred that complainant has not paying all the bills in time and amount in question is due and recoverable from him. It is admitted that bill dated 19.11.2018 for Rs.14,230/-for 1701 units was issued to him. Old ready was 1378 units and new reading was 3079 units. Meter was running okay and there was no fault in that. It is also admitted that bill dated 23.01.2019 for Rs.19,030/-for 2249 units was issued to him. Old reading was 3079 units and new reading was 5328 units. There was no fault in the meter of complainant, but on request of complainant for checking his meter, his meter was changed and his old meter was sent to ME Lab where after checking it was found that there was no fault in his meter. It is further averred that complainant himself gave his undertaking or consent that he would have no objection if his mater was checked in his absence. Bill dated 17.03.2019 for Rs.48,240/-for 3407 units was also correctly issued to complainant. All the amount is charged as per rules and complainant is liable to pay the same. Complainant has levelled false allegations against them and it is reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering OPs. All the other allegations and allegation with regard to relief sought too were refuted with a prayer that complaint deserves to be dismissed with costs.

5                                     Parties were given proper opportunities to produce evidence to prove their respective case. Counsel for complainant

cc no.-87 of 2019

tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to 7 and closed the same.

6                               In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, the opposite parties tendered in evidence affidavit of Chunish Jain as Ex OP-1 and documents Ex OP-2 to OP-4 and closed the evidence.

7                              We have heard the ld counsel for complainant as well as Ops and have carefully gone through the evidence produced on file.

8                         From the careful perusal of record and evidence produced by respective parties, it is observed that case of complainant is that OPs issued him bills dated 19.11.2018, 23.01.2019 and 17.03.2019 for wrong consumption which are very excessive. Amount of Rs. 14,230/-for 1701 units raised through bill dated 19.11.2018, amount of Rs.19,030/-for 2249 units raised through bill dated 23.01.2019 and demand for Rs.46,992-for 3407 units raised vide bill dated 17.03.2019 is illegal and unlawful. Moreover, OPs did not send him any notice for checking his meter. Meter of complainant was removed in his absence and even checking of same in ME Lab was not done in his presence and even no separate notice for these excessive charges was ever served to him. Grievance of complainant is that despite repeated requests, OPs did not correct the impugned bills and have failed to redress his grievance. Complainant has prayed for directions to OPs to withdraw the said bills. In reply, plea taken by OPs is that correct bills were issued to complainant

cc no.-87 of 2019

and this amount is charged on the basis of consumption as per rules and regulations of OPs and this amount is due towards complainant and he is liable to pay the same. As per OPs, complainant gave due consent for checking his meter in his absence, however, they failed to place on record any such undertaking given by complainant. OPs argued that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and prayer for dismissal of complaint is made.

9                             Now, it is admitted case of the parties that complainant is consumer of OPs having electric connection installed outside his premises. It is further admitted that Ops issued bills dated 19.11.2018, 23.01.2019 and 17.03.2019 to complainant for amount of Rs. 14,230/-, Rs.19,030/- and for Rs.46,992/- respectively for consumption of power units. Main plea taken by Ops is that these bills are issued to complainant as per his actual consumption. On request of complainant, his meter was checked in M E Lab and during checking meter of complainant was found to be okay and without any fault and therefore, all this amount was raised through these bills. Ld counsel for complainant pleaded before the Forum that demand raised through impugned bills is very excessive and illegal. From the careful perusal of bill dated 19.11.2018 Ex C-2, it is clear that it is issued for 1701 units for amount of Rs.14,230/-charged in this bill, from the bill Ex C-4 it is revealed that OPs have charged Rs.19,030/- for 2249 units having old reading of 3079 units and new of 5328 units. Ex C-6 bill dated 17.03.2018 also issued for 3407 units i.e 3094 units for old

cc no.-87 of 2019

meter and 313 units for new meter for Rs.46,992/-, which is more than the actual consumption. Average consumption of the complainant appears to be within 300 to 600 units, but consumption of 1701 units shown vide bill dated 19.11.2018, consumption of 2249 units shown in bill dt 23.01.2019 and of 3407 units in bill dated 17.03.2019 is highly excessive and it exceeds the maximum limit. It seems that meter in question was not recording correct consumption. As per the rules and regulations if there is any defect in the electric meter and not recording correct consumption then, the consumption shall be charged on the basis of average of last year.  The relevant regulations of PSPCL given in section 21.04 (g) (ii) of Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters Regulations 2007 vide notification no. PSERC/ Secy /Regulation 31 dated June, 29, 2007 are reproduced as hereunder:

            “The account of a consumer will be overhauled for the period a defective meter remained at site and for the period of direct supply, on the basis of energy consumption of the corresponding period of the previous year after calibrating for the changes in load, if any. In case the average consumption for the corresponding period of previous year is not available then, the consumer will be tentatively billed for the consumption to be assessed in the manner indicted in para-4 of Annexure-8 and subsequently adjusted on the basis of actual consumption in the corresponding period of the previous/succeeding year.

cc no.-87 of 2019

10                         In the instant case, the average consumption for the corresponding period of the previous year must be available with the Ops, so in view of aforementioned section 21.4 (g) ( ii) of Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters Regulations 2007, the consumer will be tentatively billed for the consumption to be assessed in the manner indicated in Para-4 of Annexure-8 and subsequently adjusted on the basis of actual consumption in the corresponding period of previous year.

11                     In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the complaint filed by the complainant is accepted and the demand raised by Ops from complainant vide bills dated 19.11.2018, 23.01.2019 and bill dated 17.03.2019 is hereby set aside and quashed. However, the Ops are at liberty to charge the complainant for the disputed period by overhauling his account on the basis of average consumption in the corresponding period of the previous year. Ops are further directed to adjust the amount of Rs.20,000/- deposited by complainant in compliance of order dated 27.03.2019 passed by this Forum in subsequent bills. Compliance of this order be made within one month of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which complainant shall be entitled to proceed under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of order be supplied to parties free of cost. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 10.12.2019

 

                                        (Param Pal Kaur)                     (Ajit Aggarwal)

            Member                                   President