DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, PUNJAB.

 

Complaint Case No : 82/2020

Date of Institution : 13.03.2020

Date of Decision : 18.01.2021

 

Mohan Lal Jindal son of Sh. Ram Parshad resident of Gali No. 7, Lakhi Colony, Barnala, District Barnala, Punjab.                                                                        …Complainant

  Versus

 

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Sub Urban Sub Division Barnala, District Barnala through its Assistant Executive Engineer.  

2. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Sub Urban Division, Dhanaula Road, Barnala, through its Senior Executive Engineer.  

3. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, The Mall Patiala, through its Chairman. 

4. Sukhdev Singh Junior Engineer, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Sub Urban Division, Dhanaula Road, Barnala.   

…Opposite Parties

 

Complaint Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Present: Sh. R.K. Singla counsel for complainant.

Sh. Jagdish Rai Garg counsel for opposite parties No. 1 to 3.  

Sh. P.S. Kaushal counsel for opposite party No. 4.

Quorum.-

1. Sh. Kuljit Singh : President

2.Sh. Tejinder Singh Bhangu : Member

(ORDER BY KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT):

  The complainant namely Mohan Lal has filed the present complaint under Consumer Protection Act (as amended upto date) against Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others. 

2. The facts leading to the present complaint are that the complainant is the tenant of Ms. Richa Khanna daughter of Sh. Mohinder Khanna and consuming the electricity having Consumer/Electricity Account No. L61NB451164F. It is further alleged that he deposited the electricity bills raised by the opposite parties time to time regularly, as such the complainant is the consumer of opposite parties. It is alleged that the opposite parties raised a bill in the month of March 2018, but the complainant could not deposit the same as the bill was not delivered to the complainant. The opposite party No. 4 visited the house of the complainant on 20.3.2018 and asked the complainant that he did not deposit the said bill in time, so they have come to disconnect the said electricity connection. The complainant told the opposite party No. 4 that he could not deposit the bill as the same was never delivered to him and the complainant is ready to pay the bill amount whatsoever. On this, the opposite party No. 4 asked the complainant to pay Rs. 31,600/- immediately, otherwise the connection will be disconnected. Accordingly, the complainant gave a cheque No. 946622 dated 20.3.2018 amounting to Rs. 31,600/- from the bank account of his son namely Mr. Sanjeev Jindal to opposite party No. 4 to save the said connection. It is further alleged that on 27.3.2018 the said cheque was debited to the bank account of Mr. Sanjiv Jindal. The opposite parties raised the bill till 3.3.2020 including consumption charges plus Rs. 31,600/- (already paid) plus surcharge and other charges. The complainant approached the opposite parties regarding adjustment of already paid amount  and the opposite parties asked the complainant every time to deposit the consumption amount excluding other charges. On 3.3.2020 the complainant received electricity bill dated 3.3.2020 indicating the consumption of 404 units for Rs. 44,490/- which included consumption charges and other charges. The complainant told the opposite parties that he has already paid all the bills and also told about the cheque of Rs. 31,600/-. On this, the opposite parties inquired the matter and found that the opposite party No. 4 has deposited the said cheque in the electricity account of some Mr. Sukhdev Singh son of Sh. Mohinder Singh and gave the copy of receipt No. 218 dated 20.3.2018 and copy of bank statement of the opposite parties to the complainant. The opposite parties refused to hear the request of the complainant. Hence, the present complaint is filed seeking the following reliefs.-

i) The opposite parties may be directed to withdraw the bill dated 3.3.2020 and raised the same on actual consumption basis i.e. 404 units.

ii) To adjust the amount of Rs. 31,600/- which paid to the opposite parties vide cheque No. 946622 dated 20.3.2020 and withdraw the sundry charges and other charges imposed till date after 20.3.2018.

iii) To pay Rs. 50,000/- on account of mental tension, agony and physical harassment. 

iv) To pay Rs. 11,000/- as litigation expenses.  

3. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite parties No. 1 to 3 filed a joint written version taking legal objections interalia on the grounds of locus-standi, cause of action, maintainability, jurisdiction and the complainant is not consumer of opposite parties etc. 

4. On merits,  it is admitted to the extent that power connection has been installed being account No. L61NB451164F. The complainant did not deposit the amount of bills. Rather, the receipts are issued in the name of registered consumer. It is further averred that consent of the registered consumer is necessary in case complaint is to be filed by any other person. The complainant and opposite party No. 4 are hand in glove as it is evident from the following paras. Further, no prudent person will hand over the cheque to JE without obtaining any receipt. Nor any opposite parties official will visit the house of a consumer on single lapse to pay the bill. It is further averred that the alleged bank transaction is not known to the answering opposite parties and moreover the opposite parties had no concern with the alleged transaction. It is submitted that the bill dated 3.3.2020 is legal and valid. The matter needs a thorough investigation/examination as such cannot be decided in summary trial. It is further submitted that the complainant is yet attempting to protect the opposite party No. 4 and their conspiracy is apparent. Further, the complainant has not reported the matter to the Police. The complainant and opposite party No. 4 are manipulating the situation. So, there is no deficiency in service on their part and they prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.

5. The opposite party No. 4 has filed separate written version taking legal objections interalia on the grounds that the present complaint is not maintainable as the opposite party No. 4 is a public servant and complainant is not the consumer of answering opposite party. Further, the complainant has no locus-standi or cause of action to file the present complaint etc. 

6. On merits, it is denied that the complainant is the tenant of Ms. Richa Khanna daughter of Sh. Mohinder Khanna having electricity account No. L61NB451164F or depositing the electricity bills raised by the opposite parties regularly time to time. It is denied that the opposite parties raised a bill in the month of March 2018 or the complainant could not deposit the same as the bill was not delivered. It is further denied that the answering opposite party visited the house of complainant on 20.3.2018. It is further denied that the answering opposite party asked the complainant to immediately pay Rs. 31,600/- otherwise the connection will be disconnected. It is also denied that the complainant gave a cheque No. 946622 dated 20.3.2018 amounting to Rs. 31,600/- from the bank account of his son Mr. Sanjeev Jindal. It is submitted that as per record no electricity bill qua the said connection was issued in the month of March 2018 and electricity bill to the said connection was issued on 22.2.2018 for an amount of Rs. 52,440/- having due dates (Bank/Cheque) 7.3.2018 (Cash/online) 9.3.2018. It is admitted to the extent that the opposite parties No. 1 to 3 issued bill dated 3.3.2020 for an amount of Rs. 44,490/- but it is denied that the complainant ever  told the opposite parties that he has already paid all the bills. It is further denied that on this the opposite parties No. 1 & 2 inquired the matter and found that answering opposite party has deposited the said cheque in the electricity account of some Mr. Sukhdev Singh son of Mohinder Singh. All other allegations of the complaint are denied and prayed for the dismissal of complaint. 

7. In support of his case, the complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of bill Ex.C-2, copy of Rent deed Ex.C-3, copy of receipt Ex.C-4, copy of statement of account Ex.C-5 dated 3.2.2020, copy of statement of account dated 19.2.2020 Ex.C-6 and closed the evidence. 

8. To rebut the case of the complainant, the opposite parties No. 1 to 3  tendered into evidence copy of bills Ex.O.P1.2.3/1 to Ex.OP1.2.3/16 and closed the evidence. 

9. Opposite party No. 4 tendered into evidence affidavit of Sukhdev Singh Gill Ex.O.P4/1, copies of bills Ex.O.P4/2 to Ex.O.P4/15 and closed the evidence. 

10. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. 

11. The case of the complainant is that the complainant is the tenant of Ms. Richa Khanna daughter of Sh. Mohinder Khanna and consuming the electricity having Consumer/Electricity Account No. L61NB451164F and he has been paying the electricity bills raised by the opposite parties regularly.  The allegation of the complainant is that the opposite parties raised a bill in the month of March 2018, but he could not deposit the same as the bill was not delivered to him and the opposite party No. 4 visited the house of the complainant on 20.3.2018 and asked him that he did not deposit the said bill in time, so they have come to disconnect the said electricity connection. Further, the opposite party No. 4 asked the complainant to pay Rs. 31,600/- immediately, otherwise the connection will be disconnected and the complainant gave a cheque No. 946622 dated 20.3.2018 for Rs. 31,600/- from the bank account of his son namely Mr. Sanjeev Jindal to opposite party No. 4 and the same was debited to the bank account of Mr. Sanjiv Jindal. The opposite parties raised the bill till 3.3.2020 including consumption charges plus Rs. 31,600/- (already paid) plus surcharge and other charges. Moreover, on 3.3.2020 the complainant received electricity bill dated 3.3.2020 indicating the consumption of 404 units for Rs. 44,490/-, which included consumption charges and other charges. 

12. In order to prove his case the complainant has placed on record his own affidavit Ex.C-1, vide which he reiterated the averments as mentioned in the complaint. He has placed on record photocopy of bill dated 3.3.2020 Ex.C-2, which shows the consumption of 404 units and the total payable amount shown as Rs. 44,490/-. In this bill Ex.C-2 arrears of current year of Rs. 6,798/- and  arrears of previous years of Rs. 27,497/- alongwith sundry charges of Rs. 40/- and other charges are also shown, which proves that the complainant has not paid the full amount of previous bills. The complainant has further placed on record photocopy of Rent Deed Ex.C-3, which shows that the complainant Mohan Lal is the tenant of Ms. Richa Khanna daughter of Mohinder Khanna. Further, the complainant has placed on record photocopy of a receipt of PSPCL dated 20.3.2018  Ex.C-4 vide which the amount of Rs. 31,600/- has been shown to be deposited with the PSPCL and cheque No. 946622 dated 20.3.2018 is mentioned. But it is important to mention here that on the receipt Ex.C-4 name of the complainant or the owner Ms. Richa Khanna is not mentioned. However, the above said receipt is in the favour of one Sukhdev Singh son of Mohinder Singh and moreover on the receipt account number 3001573002 is mentioned which is different from the consumer number/account number of the complainant i.e. L61NB451164F/3002014304 as mentioned in the bill Ex.C-2. So, we are of the view that how it is proved that the complainant has paid the amount of Rs. 31,600/- to PSPCL on 20.3.2018 with regard to the bill of March 2018. Further, to prove his case the complainant has placed on record copy of account statement of Sanjeev Jindal Ex.C-5 and account statement of PSPCL Ex.C-6, which shows that the amount of Rs. 31,600/- has been debited through cheque No. 946622 on 27.3.2018 in Ex.C-5 and credited to PSPCL in Ex.C-6. But from the Ex.C-5 & Ex.C-6 it does not prove that the above said amount of Rs. 31,600/- has been paid by Sanjeev Jindal to PSPCL for the payment of electricity bill of March 2018 on behalf of complainant.

13. On the other hand, the opposite parties No. 1 to 3 & 4 have strongly denied the case of the complainant. Even, the complainant has failed to prove the fact that the opposite party No. 4 has taken the above said cheque bearing No. 946622 of Rs. 31,600 from the complainant for the payment of bill of March 2018 and did not issue any receipt to him and the receipt Ex.C-4 is in the name of one Sukhdev Singh. Moreover, the opposite parties have placed on record the copies of bills Ex.O.P1.2.3/1 to Ex.O.P1.2.3/16 which shows the arrears of previous years bills and arrears of current years pending against the consumer. So, it is proved that the complainant/consumer has not paid the full amount of bills since March 2018. Therefore, we are of the view that the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties by adducing any cogent, reliable and trustworthy evidence.  

14. So, in view of the above discussion, we are of the view that the present complaint has no merits and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, there is no order as to costs or compensation. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. The file be consigned to the records after its due compliance. 

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:

       18th Day of January 2021 

 

            (Kuljit Singh)

            President

              

(Tejinder Singh Bhangu)

Member