Order by:
Sh.Mohinder Singh Brar, Member
1. The complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 on the allegations that the complainant occupied upper portion of Old H.No.523 and New 577 situated at Mohalla Kishanpura, Moga Distrcit Moga on lease. In which, electric connection is installed in the name of Tirath Ram. Complainant using the electricity regularly and paying the consumption charges and is beneficiary. The alleged connection was disconnected during Covid 2020 and meter was removed which was installed outside the premises, but same was resorted with the directions of Hon’ble Court of Mrs. Kulwinder Kaur, PCS Civil Judge, Jr. Division Moga on 02.05.2021 and same was decided on 21.03.2023 and new meter was installed outside the premises and thereafter the complainant started consuming the electricity. Alleged that complainant was surprised to receive bill, in which, consumption charges for the period from 13.07.2022 to 17.09.2022 was shown as consumption of 1081 units and its charges was shown as Rs.23,150/- and after that he approached the Opposite Parties personally and through email, but to no effect. Alleged that the complainant deposited the amount under protest. Due to such act and conduct of the Opposite Parties, the complainant has suffered mental tension and harassment. Hence this complaint. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.
a) Opposite Parties may be directed to recall the bill for the period 13.07.2022 to 11.09.2022 for consumption of 1081 units and demand of 23,750/- and consumption bill no. 500233693027 for the period 15.07.2023 to 16.09.2023 and bill no.500218656464 dated 15.07.2023 for demand of 7050/-.
b) To pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of Physical, mental and monetary harassment.
c) To pay an amount of Rs.30,000/- as litigation expenses.
d) And any other relief which this Commission may deem fit and proper be granted to the complainant in the interest of justice and equity.
2. Opposite parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the present complaint is not maintainable. No cause of action arose to the complainant against answering Opposite Parties. The bill in dispute for Rs.23,750/- is a consumption bill w.e.f 13.07.2022 to 11.09.2022 in lieu of consumption of 1081 units of electricity and thus consumption bill in dispute contains in it an amount of Rs.18,531/- in lieu of arrears. Thus, the bill in dispute of Rs.23,750/- includes in it defaulting amount i.e. arrears of Rs.18,531/- and Rs.5219/- in lieu of current bill of consumption of 1081 units w.e.f 13.07.2022 to 11.09.2022. Thus, bill in dispute is valid, correct and complainant is liable to pay the same and answering Opposite Party is entitled to recover the same. Averred that the electric connection which is in the name of one Tirath Ram was disconnected and removed on 29.09.2020 vide PDCO No.100011025171 due to defaulting amount of Rs.18,531/-. When on 01.03.2022, electric connection in dispute was re-connected due to orders of Hon’ble Court, regarding this amount of Rs.18,531/- a refund entry was effected as per procedure of SAP, connection could not be reconnected till defaulting amount is outstanding. Thus, in order to comply with the order of Hon’ble Court, the entry of refund amount of Rs.18,531/- had been effected. The Civil Suit of complainant stood dismissed on 21.03.2023. Vide half-margin No.8010519303 the defaulting amount was re-charged in the consumption bill in dispute. Hence present complaint is not maintainable as no cause of action arose to the complainant and the same is liable to be dismissed. On merits, all other allegations made in the complaint are denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint is made.
3. Complainant also filed replication to the written reply of Opposite Parties denying the objections raised by Opposite Parties in its written reply
4. In order to prove his case, the complainant has placed on record his affidavit as Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C12.
4. To rebut the evidence of complainant, Opposite Parties have placed on record affidavit of Sh.Baljit Singh Dhillon, SDO, PSPC Ltd. as Ex.OPs1 along with copies of documents Ex.OPs-2 to OPs-27.
5. We have gone through the documents/evidence submitted on behalf of both the parties and observed as below:-
a) The connection in dispute is in the name of Sh.Tirath Ram, but the complainant is on rent in the house of Sh.Tirath Ram. Due to non payment of consumption charges the connection of the complainant was disconnected on 29.09.2020. For reconnection of the connection, he moved to Civil Court vide Civil Suit No.933 dated 23.10.2020 and Civil Court in its interim order, ordered the PSPCL to restore the connection after depositing 50% of the amount and as per SAP system of PSPCL, RCO cannot be issued, if there is any balance outstanding in his account, so the remaining 50% of defaulting amount, they withdraw to reconnect the connection in SAP system which is recoverable after the decision of the Civil Suit on 21.03.2023 the Court of Mrs. Kulwinder Kaur, PCS Civil Judge (Junior Division), Moga dismissed the complaint of the complainant (Ex.OP2). Hence the remaining 50% of the defaulting amount which was withdrawn to issue reconnection order (RCO) is recoverable.
b) Complainant in its complaint, email dated 17.07.2022 (Ex.C11) complained that Court ordered to install the same meter which was removed, but they installed mini and defaulted meter.
c) Complainant also prayed to withdraw the bills issued for the period 13.07.2022 to 11.09.2022 and 15.07.2023 to 16.09.2023 for abovesaid consumption.
The aforesaid grievances of the complainant are denied for the reasons below:-
a) The Civil Suit filed by the complainant in Civil Court was dismissed by the Court. If, he is not satisfied with the decision of Civil Court, he may file appeal in the upper Civil court. If he feels the decision of Civil Court not implemented honestly by PSPCL, then he may file Contempt of Court.
b) In the decision of Civil Suit, Court has nowhere written that at the time of reconnection, only removed meter should be reinstalled. Once a meter is removed from the premises of the consumer, it is to be sent to Metering Equipment Lab for its internal examination. Hence, the removed meter cannot be reinstalled. As per checking reports of SDO dated 18.07.2022 the capacity of meter installed is of 60amp which is highest capacity of a single Phase meter category and matches with the sectioned load of 5.24 Kw of consumer. So the meter is not a mini meter.
c) In reply to various emails of the complainant, SDO, South Sub Division, Moga visited the premises of the consumer on 18.07.2022 (Ex.OPs10) and prepared site checking report of the meter/premises of the consumer vide checking report 05/411 dated 18.07.2022 (Ex.OPs10). While checking SDO observed that the meter is OK but the wiring of the consumer is too old/defective. Complainant also signed on the checking report. So on 18.07.2022, the complainant sent an email to Opposite Parties, in which, he wrote that officials of Opposite Parties visited his premises and he withdrawn his complaint. The complainant has challenged the consumption of the meter for the period 07/22 to 09/22 and 07/23 to 09/23, which shows that for the months (July to September) in 2022 and 2023 meter reading is not ok, but for the remaining 10 months the meter working is ok, which is not genuine. Even the consumption data (OPs-11 to OPs13) shows that the consumption of that period July to September of 2022 and 2023 are matching/comparable with the consumption of corresponding previous years.
6. From the above discussion we came to the conclusion that the present complaint is dismissed against all the opposite parties. Both the parties bear their own costs. The copy of order is supplied to both the parties free of cost. The file be consigned to record room.
Announced on Open Commission
