BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.213 of 2017
Date of Instt. 10.07.2017
Date of Decision: 12.01.2021
Iqbal Singh s/o S.Karam Singh R/o Village Dhodhe Mustafapur, Bhogpur district Jalandhar.
..........Complainant
Versus
1. Chairman Shakti Sadan, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Mall Road, Patiala.
2. XEN, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Sub-Division Bhogpur District Jalandhar.
3. SE, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Hoshiarpur.
….….. Opposite Parties
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Sh. Kuljit Singh (President)
Smt. Jyotsna (Member)
Present: Sh. Saurabh Sharma, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.
Sh. K. L. Dua, Adv. Counsel for the OPs No.1 to 3.
Order
Kuljit Singh (President)
1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that the complainant is the actual consumer of the electricity connection bearing No.H11FB570965N lying at the residence of the complainant at Dhodhe Mustafapur, Bhogpur District Jalandhar, which exist in the name of the complainant. The complainant is an agriculturist and earns his livelihood through cultivation. That the meter of the said connection is lying installed outside the residence of the complainant. That the connection is regularly checked by the officials of the OPs and at the time of checking meter reading electricity consumption bill is generated and handed to the complainant. That the consumption of the electricity by the complainant is between 500 units to 1300 units per billing cycle and as per the consumption the complainant is regularly paying the consumption charges regularly to the PSPCL department. That in the month of September, 2016 the complainant got shocked to see the electricity bill No.369 dated 02 Sept. 2016 for the period from 5 July 2016 to 2 September 2016 was Rs.89,500/- comprising of 11617 units of electricity consumption. Immediately the complainant approached to the PSPCL department for checking of the meter as the complainant never used such high consumption wherein he was advised to pay Rs.16,000/- and move an application for checking of the electricity meter as per the advice of the OP No.2 complainant deposited Rs.16,000/- on 09.09.2017 as and the representative of the OPs took the defective meter for checking and installed the new in the place of defective meter. After words the complainant was regularly paying the consumption charges to the department. That in the bills of the complainant is a huge amount was still shown by the PSPCL. But the complainant was duly paying the electricity consumption bill as per his normal consumption. That in the month of May 2017, the complainant approached to the OP No.2 to inquire about the report of the checking of the defective meter which was taken into the custody by the officials of the OPs. The OP No.2 told the complainant that his meter was defected and was running 55% faster than the normal speed so they advised him to deposit the balance amount to the department in order to save his electricity connection from disconnection. The complainant was surprised that after report of defective meter the OP No.2 was asking for deposit about Rs.87,820/- disputed bill dated 29.04.2017 amount which was proved by their own checking report that the meter was defective and was running 55% faster than normal speed. That on 12.06.2017 the complainant sent application to the OPs to review and rectify the electricity consumption bill of the complainant, but the OPs never replied nor approached to the complainant regarding the said application. That the complainant is having apprehension that due to non-payment of illegal bill arrear of the defective meter officials of the OPs might disconnect the electricity connection and due to this the complainant will suffer irreparable loss in terms of money and money worth and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to review the electricity bills defective electricity meter of the complainant electricity connection bearing No.B11FB570965N and not to disconnect the electricity connection and be also directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/-.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, who filed reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that no cause of action arose to the complainant to file the present false and frivolous complaint. It is further alleged that the benefit of the result of the meter has already been given to the complainant in the month of April, 2017. That the complainant is barred by his act and conduct from filing the present complaint. The present complaint is the misuse of the process of the Forum and the amount has been charged as per the checking of the meter and the correct amount has been charged vide letter NO.1492 dated 19.07.2017. The present complaint has become infructuous and the same is liable to be dismissed on this sole score. It is further averred that the false and frivolous complaint has been filed with malafide intention, just to pressurize and malign the OPs and to delay the payment of the legal outstanding charges. On merits, it is admitted that in the month of September 2016, the complainant received the bill No.369 dated 02.09.2016 for Rs.89,500/- in respect of 11517 units and also admitted that the complainant approached the OP at Bhogpur for checking of the meter and also deposited a sum of Rs.120/- as meter checking fee. It is also admitted that the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.16,000/- out of the disputed bill, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.
3. In order to prove the case of the complainant, counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CA alongwith some documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-17 and closed the evidence.
4. In order to rebut the case of the complainant, counsel for the OPs No.1 to 3 tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.OPA alongwith some documents Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-4 and closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the argument from learned counsel for both the parties and also gone through the case file very minutely.
6. Precisely, the case of the complainant is that the complainant is the actual consumer of the electricity connection bearing No.H11FB570965N and the said connection was regularly checked by the officials of the OPs and the consumption of the electricity by the complainant is between 500 units to 1300 units per billing cycle and the complainant regularly paying the consumption charges to the PSPCL department. But in the month of September, 2016 the complainant got shocked to see the electricity bill No.369 dated 02 Sept. 2016 for the period from 5 July 2016 to 2 September 2016 was Rs.89,500/- comprising of 11617 units of electricity consumption, copy of the same is Ex.C-7, then the complainant immediately approached to the PSPCL department for checking of the meter as the complainant never used such high consumption wherein he was advised to pay Rs.16,000/- and move an application for checking of the electricity meter as per the advice of the OP No.2 complainant deposited Rs.16,000/- on 09.09.2017 as and the representative of the OPs took the defective meter for checking and installed the new in the place of defective meter. After words the complainant was regularly paying the consumption charges to the department. Thereafter, in the month of May 2017, the complainant approached to the OP No.2 to inquire about the report of the checking of the defective meter which was taken into the custody by the officials of the OPs. The OP No.2 told the complainant that his meter was defected and was running 55% faster than the normal speed so they advised him to deposit the balance amount to the department in order to save his electricity connection from disconnection. The complainant was surprised that after report of defective meter the OP No.2 was asking for deposit about Rs.87,820/- disputed bill dated 29.04.2017 amount which was proved by their own checking report that the meter was defective and was running 55% faster than normal speed. Regarding this, the complainant sent an application on 12.06.2017 to the OPs for reviewing and rectifying the electricity consumption bill of the complainant, but the OPs failed to do so and as such, the complainant filed the present complaint.
7. On the other hand, the OPs admitted in his reply at Para No.5 that the complainant has been regularly making the payment of the consumption charges. But the advice of this adjustment which was sent was not taken by the computer as such the wrong bill was issued to the complainant. The adjustment of the 55% fastness of the computer was given to the complainant in the month of April, 2017 much before the filing of the present complaint. Furthermore, in the affidavit of Er. Jaswant Singh, Senior Executive Engineer i.e. Ex.OPA, the fact regarding fastness of meter is also admitted. Apart from that in document Ex.C-12, it is clearly mentioned that the meter was defected and was running 55% fast than normal speed.
8. After considering the overall fact and circumstances, one thing is clear that the meter was running 55% fast than normal speed, which is evident from document Ex.C-12 as well as affidavit Ex.OA and also the OPs admitted this fact in his reply at Para No.5. Furthermore, the complainant paying the regular bill to the PSPCL and there is no fault on the part of the complainant. In his evidence, he brought all the electricity consumption bills and applications and one important report Ex.C-12. From the evidence of the complainant, it is also clear that there is no fault on the part of the complainant. Therefore, from all the angles, the case of the complainant is fully proved and the complainant is entitled for the relief as claimed.
9. As a result of our above discussion, there is merit in the present complaint and same is partly accepted. Accordingly the OPs are directed to review the electricity bills of the defective electricity meter of the complainant and not to disconnect the same. The OPs are further directed to pay Rs.5000/- to the complainant as consolidated amount of compensation for mental tension & harassment and litigation expenses. Compliance of the order be made within the period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the opposite parties are directed to pay the above mentioned amount of Rs.5000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of order till actual realization. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:
12th Day of January 2021
(Kuljit Singh)
President
(Jyotsna)
Member
