Punjab

Sangrur

CC/473/2018

Shri Niwas - Complainant(s)

Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Sandip Kumar Goyal

05 Jul 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR      

                                                                          

                                                                   Complaint No. 473

                                                                   Instituted on: 19.11.2018

                                                                   Decided on:   05.07.2019

 

Shri Niwas son of Sat Pal, resident of Near Nam Charcha Ghar, Patiala Road, Sangrur, Tehsil and District Sangrur.

           

                                                …. Complainant  

                                Versus

 

1.       Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, The Mall, Patiala through its CMD.

2.       SDO, PSPCL, Sub Urban, Sub Division, Sangrur, District Sangrur.

                                              ….Opposite parties.

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT    :Shri  S.K.Goyal,   Advocate                        

FOR THE OPP. PARTIES    :    Shri Hitesh Jindal, Advocate                         

Quorum              

                            

Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President

Ms. Vandana Sidhu, Member

Shri Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member

 

ORDER BY:     

 

Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President.

 

1.             The present complaint is filed by the complainant stating that he has obtained one domestic electricity connection bearing account number 3004767615 at his house and has been paying all the bills issued by the Opposite parties regularly.  He further alleges that the complainant is using the electricity connection upto the amount of Rs.2000/- for the consumption of two months and the meter status of the complainant remained OK during that period.  Though there is no irregularity on the part of the complainant yet in the month of January/February, 2018, the meter of the complainant was changed by the Opposite parties and new meter was installed at its place, therefore, the Opposite parties have issued a bill for Rs.14,800/- dated 10.09.2018, which is of very high amount compared to previous bills issued by the opposite parties.  In this bill, the consumption of electricity is only 190 units and as per the bill an amount of Rs.13321/- was added as sundry charges.  The complainant further alleges that old remover meter has not been sent to the ME laboratory by the opposite parties and as such assessment is made without providing any opportunity of being heard to the complainant, therefore, he alleges that this demand is totally wrong and illegal.  The complainant sent a legal notice to the opposite parties through his counsel but the opposite parties neither withdrew the demand nor replied to the said legal notice.  The complainant has left with no other option but to knock the door of this Forum to get justice.  Lastly, the complainant has prayed that the Opposite parties be directed to withdraw the illegal demand of Rs.14800/- raised vide bill dated 10.09.2018 and to pay Rs.20,000/- on account of mental tension and harassment and Rs.20,000/- towards litigation expenses.

 

2.             After the notice being served upon the opposite parties, the opposite parties put appearance before this Forum and filed the reply taking legal objections that the complaint is not maintainable; that the complainant has no cause of action qua the opposite parties to file the present complaint and that the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands.  They denied all the allegations made against them by the complainant and stated in para number 3 ( c) that Rs.13,321/- were charged as sundry charges because another connection number PR-14/423 was also running in the house of the complainant in the name of his father Shri Satpal and vide checking number 50859 dated 24.7.2018, which is Annexure R-2, it is found that the above said connection was permanently disconnected and at that time, the amount of Rs.13,270/- was pending, which was not deposited by the father of the complainant.  Thus, this amount was transferred to the account of the complainant and notice to this effect was issued vide letter number 1754 dated 30.7.2018.  Thus, the Ops have rightly charged the amount of Rs.13,321/- as sundry charges vide bill dated 10.09.2018. Lastly, the Ops have prayed to dismiss the complaint with costs.

 

3.             The complainant has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-5 and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the opposite parties has produced Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-5 and closed evidence.

 

4.             We have gone through the pleadings of the parties and documents placed by the parties in the Forum as well as heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

 

5.             In this complaint, the main allegation of the complainant is that the Opposite parties have issued the bill of Rs.14,800/- dated  10.09.2018 illegally and wrongly, therefore, this demand is illegal, null and void and the complainant is not liable to pay the same being illegal demand.  In para number 3 ( c) of the reply, the opposite parties have admitted that the amount of Rs.13,321/- was charged as sundry charges on account of another connection bearing number PR14/423, which is in the name of Shri Satpal.  It is settled preposition of law that any amount outstanding against one electricity connection cannot be added to the bill of another connection. This law is clearly laid down in Punjab State Electricity Board versus Garjit Kaur 2004(1) CLT 622.  Further in Kuldeep Singh versus Punjab State Electricity Board, decided on 13.8.2013, the Hon’ble Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in First Appeal No.1066 of 2007 has held that the amount due towards father cannot be added in the account of the son even on moral grounds and from the citation, it is very much clear that the Ops are not entitled to recover the amount of Shri Satpal, father of the complainant from the complainant being a different legal entity.  Hence, the complaint is allowed and we set aside the demand of Rs.13,321/- raised vide bill dated 10.09.2018 and interest and penalties thereupon.  The Opposite parties are directed to withdraw the demand of Rs.13,321/- along with surcharge imposed thereupon.  It is further directed to pay a lump sum compensation of Rs.3000/- for mental agony, harassment and litigation expenses.  This order be complied with by the opposite parties within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. A certified copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost as per rules. File be consigned to records.

       

                        Pronounced.

                        July 5, 2019.

 

(Vinod Kumar Gulati)  (Vandana Sidhu) (Amrinder Singh Sidhu)

          Member                  Member                 President