Punjab

Faridkot

CC/18/156

Ved Parkash - Complainant(s)

Versus

PSPCL - Opp.Party(s)

lakhbinder Singh Golewala

22 Jul 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

                                                     Complaint No :        156 of 2018

    Date of Institution :    25.09.2018

    Date of Decision :      22.07.2019

Ved Parkash aged about 53 years son of Des Raj, resident of Sanjay Nagar, Street No. 4, Near Railway Station, Faridkot, Tehsil  and District Faridkot.

                                                             ...Complainant

Versus

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall, Patiala, through its Chairman cum Managing Director.
2. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., through its Executive Engineer, PSPCL, Operation Division, Faridkot.
3. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Sub Urban Sub Division, Faridkot through its Assistant Executive Engineer.

   .........Ops

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum:   Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President,

                Smt. Parampal Kaur, Member,

 

Present: Sh Lakhwinder Singh, Ld Counsel for complainant,

   Sh Mohan Singh Brar, Ld Counsel for OPs.

 

ORDER

 (Ajit Aggarwal, President)

cc no. 156 of 2018

                                         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 correct the bill dt 9.08.2018 for Rs.1,02,590/- and to pay Rs.50,000/-as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by complainant and Rs.20,000/-as litigation expenses to complainant.

2                                           Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he is having electric connection bearing a/c no. 3000400077 and he is paying all the bills regularly as and when received and nothing is due towards him. Meter in question is installed in his premises which consisted of only two rooms and one kitchen, bathroom and sanctioned load for his meter was .40 KW. It is submitted that earlier meter of complainant was running very fast and on requests of complainant through applications datd 12.06.2017, 19.08.2017 and 21.08.2017, Ops changed his defective meter and after installation of new meter, first bill came for 24 units for Rs.1452/- but in said bill Rs.63,439/-were wrongly added as arrears. Complainant could not deposit the same and then OPs again added this amount in next bill and sent huge and inflated bill to him. despite repeated requests, OPs did not allow him to deposit the actual consumption charges and illegally disconnected his electric connection. All this act of OPs in sending huge inflated bills and disconnecting his electric connection amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs and this act and conduct of Ops has caused loss, harassment and mental tension to complainant for which he has prayed

cc no. 156 of 2018

for seeking directions to Ops to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him alongwith Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses besides main relief. Hence, this complaint.

3                                                   Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dt 25.09.2018, 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 earlier meter of complainant was installed inside his premises and thereafter as per policy of Government, it was installed outside his premises. Complainant challenged his meter and vide job order dated 18.12.2017, his earlier meter was removed in his presence and sent for checking to M E Lab, where after checking it was found to be correct. When his old meter was removed, new meter was installed in its place on 30.12.2017 with zero reading. Consumption of removed meter was 192 units and of new meter was 199 units up to 31.03.2018 and thus, total bill for 391 units for Rs.2600/-was sent to him in March, 2018. By adding previous arrear of Rs.73,435/-, current bill for Rs.76,060/-was issued and next bill for 24 units for May, 2018 and bill for July, 2018 for 2453 units and current bill for Rs.20,568/-alongwith arrears of Rs.83,507/-i.e total of Rs.1,03,080/-was issued to complainant correctly

cc no. 156 of 2018

on account of consumption charges and complainant is liable to pay the same. Complainant did not make payment for consumption of power and himself delayed the due payment of PSPCL and even his connection was disconnected due to non payment of consumption charges by him. complainant failed to deposit the consumption charges on one pretext or the other and kept delaying payment of bills issued to him from time to time. All this amount is charged as per rules and regulations of PSPCL and he is liable to pay the same. It is further averred that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs as he himself delayed payment of due amount to OPs and thus, he  is not entitled for any relief or compensation as sought by him. 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 29 and closed the same.

6                                                           To controvert the allegations of complainant, ld counsel for OPs tendered in evidence affidavit of Chunish Jain Ex OP-1 and documents Ex OP-2 to 38 and then, closed the same on behalf of OPs.

 

cc no. 156 of 2018

7                                           We have heard the ld counsel for complainant as well OPs and have carefully perused the record available on file.

8                                              From the careful perusal of record and evidence and documents placed on record by respective parties, it is observed that case of the complainant is that OPs have been issuing him bill with excessive consumption charges. As per complainant, his meter was running very fast and on his request, OPs changed his old meter and installed a new one, but there after they kept sending him bills containing excessive amount on account of arrears of previous meter and for consumption, which is quite illegal. Grievance of complainant is that despite repeated requests, OPs have not corrected his bills and have disconnected his connection without getting deposited current consumption charges from him. Main contention of complainant is that though no amount on account of consumption charges is due towards him, but despite repeated requests OPs did not redress his grievance. On the other hand plea taken by OPs is that on request of complainant they changed his old meter and installed new one with zero reading. It was found that meter of complainant was working properly and was recording correct reading. There was no defect in old meter and amount has been charged as per rules and regulations and there is no irregularity in amount charged to complainant. It is observed that since removal of his old meter and installation of new meter outside his premises on 30.12.2017, complainant has not made any payment on account of

cc no. 156 of 2018

consumption charges.  For the period from 31.12.2017 to 31.03.2018, bill for 199 units alongwith 192 units of previous meter for Rs.2600/-was sent to him, but he did not pay the bill and even his connection was disconnected due to non payment of consumption charges by him. Complainant is in habit of delaying the payment of consumption charges and all this amount charged to complainant on account of consumption charges is charged as per rules and regulations of PSPCL and he is liable to pay the same. Document Ex OP-2 clearly depicts the fact that on 30.12.2017, new meter installed outside his premises was having zero reading at the time of installation. Bills Ex OP-9 to Ex OP-31 clearly depict the old reading and new reading and amount of arrears due towards complainant on account of old reading and new reading. Documents Ex OP-32 to OP-38 are copies of detail amount charged to complainant on account of consumption and these documents clearly prove the version of OPs. There seems to be no irregularity in these bills. Complainant is liable to pay the amount charged.

9                            In the light of above discussion and arguments advanced by parties, it is made out that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs in charging the amount on account of consumption of units as per reading. Complainant has failed to make payment of consumption charges regularly and amount outstanding towards complainant on account of consumption charges has become arrears, which complainant is liable to pay. OPs have given clear detail of amount charged for the period from 30.09.2014 to 9.08.2018 and there is

cc no. 156 of 2018

no illegality in amount charged. Complainant is liable to pay the amount for the power consumed and OPs are entitled to recover the same. Complainant has failed to prove his case and therefore, complaint in hand is hereby dismissed. However, in peculiar circumstances of the case, there are no orders as to costs. Copy of order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 22.07.2019

 

(Parampal Kaur)                          (Ajit Aggarwal)

 Member                            President