DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)

                                  Consumer Complaint No.491 of 2015

                                                Date of institution:  01.10.2015                                         Date of decision   :  29.09.2016

Surinder Kumar Sharma son of T.D. Sharma resident of House No.9, Gulmohar Block, Dhakoli, Zirakpur, Mohali (Punjab).

 ……..Complainant

                                        Versus

1.     Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Sub Division Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar (Mohali) through the SDO Commercial.

2.     Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, The Mall, Mall Road, Sheran Wala Gate, Patiala, Punjab through its Chairman.

                                                           ………. Opposite Parties

Complaint under Sections 12 to 14

of the Consumer Protection Act

Quorum

Shri Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President                          Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Member.

Mrs. R.K. Aulakh, Member.

Present:    Shri Chitresh Sharma, counsel for the complainant.

                Shri Jashanpreet Singh, counsel for the OPs.

ORDER

By Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President

                Complainant, Surinder Kumar Sharma son of T.D. Sharma resident of House No.9, Gulmohar Block, Dhakoli, Zirakpur, Mohali (Punjab), has filed this complaint against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as the OPs) under Sections 12 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:

2.             The complainant, who is Ex-defence personnel, has been consumer with the OPs since 2004 vide account No.Z74GT741792M.  He has never defaulted in payment of bills.  In 2012 due to malfunction of transformer, the meter the complainant and of his neighbourers were burnt. The meter of the neighbourers was changed but that of the complainant was not changed. On enquiry, it was informed that due to shortage of three phase meters, his meter would be changed lateron which ultimately was changed in June, 2014.  On 22.08.2015 the OP issued bill for Rs.52,379/- and the complainant did not get any satisfactory explanation from the OPs. Upon his online complaint at the online portal of the OPs, he was informed that the amount has been charged as sundry charges for the period July 2014 to December, 2014. The complainant himself examined the bills for the aforesaid period and found that the OPs had not charged for 2070 units and he vide request dated 07.09.2015 asked the OPs to correct the bills and showed his willingness to pay for the uncharged unit. This request was followed by another request dated 14.09.2015 but till date the OPs did not resolve the issue.   Hence this complaint for giving directions to the OPs to correct the amount charged in the bills; to pay him Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment etc.

3.             The complaint is contested by the OPs by filing written statement in which they had raised certain preliminary objections, inter alia, that the complainant has concealed material facts as the electricity meter was issued on 07.11.2012 at the request dated 25.10.2012 of the complainant.  The complainant was being charged on average since 2012 as whenever the officials of the OPs used to go to the house of the complainant for installation of new meter the house used to be locked or the family members of the complainant used to refuse the installation of new meter by making excuse that the complainant is not at home.  The complainant has been receiving bills on average basis since 2012 to June 2014.  The amount charged was very well intimated to the complainant.    On merits also, the OPs have denied the averments of the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

5.             In order to prove the case, the complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex. CW-1/1; copies of bill Ex.C-1;  reply of Grievance Cell Ex.C-2; bills Ex.C-3 to C-8 and representations dated 07.09.2015 and 14.09.2015 Ex.C-9 and C-10.   In rebuttal the OPs tendered in evidence affidavit of Er. Ashwani Kumar, Addl. SE Ex.OP-1/1; copies of receipt dated 07.11.2012 Ex.OP-1; ledger book Ex.OP-2; data of consumption Ex.OP-3; calculation sheet Ex.OP-4; letter dated 03.08.2015 Ex.OP-5 and electricity supply instructions manual Ex.OP-6.

6.             The learned counsel for the complainant has argued that though the meter of the complainant alongwith other neighbourers was burnt in 2012 but the OPs have changed the meter of the complainant in June, 2014. Thereafter in the bill dated 22.08.2015 the OPs have arbitrarily charged Rs.52,379/- as sundry charges. The complainant vide his representations dated 07.09.2015 Ex.C-9 and 14.09.2015 Ex.C-10  intimated the OPs that as per his own examination of the bills for the period July, 2014 to December, 2014, 2070 units were not charged by the OPs, charges for which the complainant  offered to pay but the OPs have not resolved the grievance of the complainant.

7.             On the other hand learned counsel for the OPs has argued that the demand of sundry charges has been correctly made from the complainant as the bills were being issued to the complainant on average basis since 2012 to June, 2014 as it is evident from OP-3 to OP-5.He stated that due to own resistance by the family members of the complainant, the meter could not be changed in 2012 itself. He pleaded that the said charges were only imposed on the basis of the internal audit report and the same is established from the ledger book i.e. Ex.OP-2, data of consumption i.e. Ex.OP-3 and calculation sheet i.e. Ex.OP-4.The learned counsel contended that the OPs are ready and willing to receive the said payment by way of installments, in case complainant is unable to deposit the same in lump sum. He argued that the complainant is liable to pay the same being consumption charges.

8.             After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the pleadings, evidence and written arguments as well as oral submission, we find force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the OPs. It is proved from the material placed on record i.e. ledger book (Ex.OP-2), data of consumption (Ex.OP-3), calculation sheet (Ex.OP-4) and letter dated 03.08.2015( Ex.OP-5) that the  that bills were being issued to the complainant on average basis since 2012 to June, 2014.We are of the view that the proper bills were not being issued to the complainant because the meter of the complainant got burnt in the year 2012,thus average bills were being issued.

9.             Accordingly in view of our aforesaid discussion, we are of the view that no deficiency of services had been committed by the OPs in view of the material placed on record by the OPs. In our opinion the OPs are entitled to recover the arrears but only by way of 6 (Six) installments. Hence the present complainant is hereby disposed of, in view of our aforestated observation. No order as to cost.  

                The arguments on the complaint were heard on 15.09.2016 and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced

Dated: 29.09.2016    

                                         (A.P.S.Rajput)           

President

        (Amrinder Singh Sidhu)

Member

(Mrs. R.K. Aulakh)

Member