Punjab

Faridkot

CC/19/143

Simarjit Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

PSPCL - Opp.Party(s)

Ranjit Singh

14 Jan 2020

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

                                                                   Complaint No :           143 of 2019

Date of Institution :      03.06.2019

Date of Decision :        14.01.2020

Simerjit Kaur aged about 62 years wife of Jaswant Singh, r/o Street No.10-R, Dogar Basti, 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 City 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 Mohan Singh Brar, 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

cc no.-143 of 2019

State Power Corporation Ltd etc/Ops seeking directions to Ops to withdraw the demand of Rs.46,094/- raised vide bill memo dated 12.04.2019 and for further directing them to pay Rs.10,000/- 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.3000426101 in her name and she has been paying all the bills as and when received and nothing is due towards her on account of consumption charges. It is submitted that meter of complainant is installed outsider her premises in a pillar box and she has no access to that. It is submitted that meter of complainant was burnt and it was checked by employees of OPs. As per directions of OPs, complainant deposited cost of meter and thereafter, OPs removed her meter in her absence in unsealed position. After that complainant received notice no.1004 dated 12.04.2019 vide which OPs raised demand of Rs.46,094/-from complainant on the ground of alleged checking of meter by Senior XEN (Enforcement) Moga without giving notice to complainant. It is alleged that OPs checked the meter of complainant in his absence without giving him any intimation regarding it. After burning of his meter, OPs have been issuing bills on average basis and complainant was paying the same as and when received and nothing is due towards her on account of consumption charges. It is submitted that meter of complainant was never checked or sealed packed

cc no.-143 of 2019

in her presence. It is further submitted that on receiving the notice no.1004 dated 12.04.2019 vide which OPs raised demand of Rs.46,094/-, complainant approached office of OPs and made several requests to them to withdraw the said notice, but all in vain. OPs did not pay any heed to the genuine requests of complainant, rather threatened to disconnect her electric connection, if she fails to pay the entire amount in time. All this amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of OPs and it has caused huge harassment and mental agony to her. Complainant has prayed for seeking directions to OPs to set aside the demand of Rs.46,094/-raised vide notice no.1004 dated 12.04.2019 and for further directing them to pay compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by complainant besides litigation expenses incurred by complainant. Hence, this complaint.

3                                       Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 10.06.2019, 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 wherein they have denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong and incorrect and asserted that as per Policy of PSPCL, all the meters installed in houses were taken out and installed outside the premises in separate pillar box and as per their procedure, removed meters were required to be presented in ME Lab and while

cc no.-143 of 2019

sending the meters in ME Lab, doubtful meter were to be checked and others were to be sent in scrap. Meter of complainant was  presented in ME Lab vide challan no.166 dated 27.03.2019. It was checked on 27.03.2019 by Pardeep Kumar AE ME Lab, Moga alongwith other officials of PSPCL and during checking it was found that it was intentionally burnt by consumer and line data of meter showed the reading of 50437 on 18.05.2017. Thereafter, the same meter reading was taken uptill April, 2018 and bill was issued accordingly. As per instructions, account of complainant was overhauled from 18.06.2017 to April, 2018 on the basis of previous year consumption for the same period for the year 2016-17. Meter was duly sealed packed and handed over to concerned JE and all persons, present at the time of checking signed the checking report no.109/1941 dated 27.03.2019. Notice no.1004 dated 12.04.2019 was issued to complainant on the basis of checking report dated 27.03.2019. 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 tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to 6 and closed the same.

cc no.-143 of 2019

6                                      In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, ld Counsel for opposite parties tendered in evidence affidavit of Gaurav Kakkar as Ex OP-1, documents Ex OP-2 to Ex OP-11, but thereafter he did not conclude his evidence despite availing sufficient opportunities and therefore, evidence of OPs was closed by order of this Forum dated 11.12.2019.

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 notice  dt 12.042019 for Rs.46,094/- on the basis of checking dt 27.03.2019, which is very excessive as compare to normal consumption. Complainant has no information regarding checking of his meter and OPs have illegally charged this amount, which is very excessive. This amount is highly excessive and despite repeated requests, OPs did not withdraw the said notice and have failed to redress his grievance. He has prayed for directions to OPs to withdraw the demand raised vide notice no.1004 dated 12.04.2019. In reply, plea taken by OPs is that amount in question is charged as per checking report dated 27.03.2019 vide which it was cleared that meter of complainant was burnt by complainant intentionally and uptill 18.05.2017, meter reading was

cc no.-143 of 2019

50437. After that, the same reading was taken uptill April 2018 and bill was issued accordingly. The account of complainant was overhauled from 18.06.2017 to April 2018 on the basis of previous year consumption. It is further argued that there is no deficiency in service on their part and complainant has levelled false and incorrect allegations against them. OPs have made prayer for dismissal of complaint.

9                         OPs have themselves admitted in written reply that meter of complainant is installed outside her premises in a separate pillar box and nobody has any access to that. Huge amount of Rs.46,094/-charged on the basis of alleged checking dated 27.03.2019 which was not conducted in the presence of complainant, has no relevance as on 27.03.2019, meter of complainant was installed outside her premises. Moreover, it is observed that OPs have charged this amount for the period from 18.06.2017 to April, 2018. On 18.06.2017, reading of the meter was 50437 and therefore, the same reading was recorded uptill 19.02.2018. It is observed that if meter was not recording proper reading or if there was any fault in said meter, OPs were required to charge the complainant for said period on average basis and moreover, there is no detail regarding huge amount charged by OPs. OPs have failed to bring on record any documentary evidence to prove that how they calculated the amount of Rs.46,094/- for above said period. Ld counsel for complainant pleaded before the Forum that amount in question is raised vide memo  no.1004 dated 12.04.2019 for consumption of 50437 units and it is very excessive

cc no.-143 of 2019

and illegal. Amount of Rs.46,094/- raised by Ops vide notice no.1004 dated 12.04.2019 on account of arrears is inappropriate and does not seem to be correct. 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 proper 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 /Regu. 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.

10                                    In the instant case, the average consumption for the corresponding period of the previous years must be available with the Ops, so in view of aforementioned section 21.4 (g) ( ii) of Electricity

cc no.-143 of 2019

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 notice no.1004 dated 12.04.2019 is set aside and quashed. Ops are directed to overhaul the account of complainant for the period from 18.06.2017 to 19.02.2018 and charge the complainant on the basis of average consumption in the corresponding period of the previous year and also to adjust the amount if any paid by complainant for consumption during above said period. 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 : 14.01.2020

 

                                        (Param Pal Kaur)                     (Ajit Aggarwal)

            Member                                   President