BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.364 of 2014

Date of Instt. 17.10.2014

Date of Decision :07.05.2015

Pritam Dass aged about 60 years son of Jwala Ram R/o Village Rastgo, PO Madhopur, Bhogpur, District Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

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

2. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd, Sub Division-II, Bhogpur, District Jalandhar through its SDO/AEE.

.........Opposite parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Before: S. Jaspal Singh Bhatia (President)

Ms. Jyotsna Thatai (Member)

Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Sh.Arvinder Sharda Adv., counsel for complainant.

Sh.Chandandeep Singh Adv., counsel for OPs.

Order

J.S Bhatia (President)

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the opposite parties on the averments that the complainant has taken domestic supply electricity connection from the opposite parties under account bearing No.H12BR262050X with a connected load of 0.94 KW. The opposite parties have installed a meter bearing No.094114 at the residence of the complainant. The complainant had been paying regularly energy consumption bills to the opposite parties and nothing is due to be paid out of the regular energy consumption bills to the opposite parties. On 28.8.2014, the complainant received a regular bill for the period 13.7.2014 to 28.8.2014 amounting to Rs.8425/-. The said bill was raised towards very higher side, so the complainant approached the opposite parties for finding the reasons for raising such a huge bill. The opposite party No.2 advised the complainant to make a written request. Accordingly on 11.9.2014, the complainant made a written request to the opposite parties No.2 to check faulty reading in consumption of electricity pertaining to the aforementioned electricity meter running at the resident of the complainant. Acting upon the said written request of the complainant, the opposite party No.2 deputed one of JE to look into the matter. Accordingly, inspection of the meter was conducted by the said JE under letter bearing No.1625 dated 11.9.2014. Under the said inspection, which was scribed by the said JE on the application itself, the meter reading of the said meter was shown to be 02846 on 10.9.2014. Whereas in the aforementioned bill, the meter reading is shown to be 3872 on 28.8.2014. The complainant apprised the concerned officials of the opposite parties about the discrepancy of the meter reading between the aforementioned energy bill and the aforementioned checking. To this the concerned officials refused to hear anything from complainant and directed the complainant to deposit the aforementioned bill, otherwise, the supply of electricity to the residential premises of the complainant would be disconnected. This act of opposite parties of raising the impugned bill dated 28.8.2014 on the basis of faulty meter reading under which a sum of Rs.8425/- was illegally charged from the complainant, amounts of deficiency in services on the part of opposite parties. It is very strange way of working of the meter readers of the opposite parties that the meter reading is shown to be 3872 on 28.8.2014. Whereas the JE of the opposite parties under his report dated 10.9.2014 clearly mentioned that the meter reading of the said meter was 02846 on 10.9.2014 itself. Moreover, the JE under his report dated 10.9.2014 found the meter in proper working order. It is most probable that the said meter reader, did not personally visit to note the meter reading and on the contrary, used to write frivolous consumption of electricity pertaining to the electricity meter of the complainant. In this way, the opposite parties overcharged consumption of electricity upto the extent of 03872-02840(2846) =1032(1026) units of electricity and thereby causing a loss of Rs.7000/- to the complainant. This illegal act of opposite parties has caused mental harassment to the complainant. The complainant got issued a legal notice dated 12.9.2014 to the opposite parties to rectify the impugned bill. Despite lapse of about one month after service of the legal notice, the opposite parties failed to do the needful. On such like averments, the complainant has prayed for directing the opposite parties to set-aside the above said bill dated 28.8.2014 for Rs.8425/- and rectify the same as per inspection report dated 10.9.2014. He has also claimed Rs.11,000/- as compensation and further Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.

2. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared and filed a written reply, inter-alia, pleading that on 28.8.2014, the opposite parties issued the bill for Rs.8425/- and on the receipt of the bill, complainant made a written representation for checking the reading of the said connection. On receipt of aforesaid written representation, the opposite party No.2, acting diligently directed the junior engineer to visit the premises and check the reading of the meter of electric connection H12BR262050X. The concerned JE visited the premises of the complainant, checked the reading and reported the reading as 02846. Action was in hand to rectify the bill but the complainant acting hasty filed the consumer complaint without any cause of action. However, the opposite parties have already withdrawn the said bill in the Forum vide letter dated 25.11.2014, on the first few hearings. Hence on this score alone, complaint is liable to be dismissed. They denied other material averments of the complainant.

3. In support of his complaint, learned counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CA alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4 and closed evidence.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite parties has tendered affidavit Ex.OA alongwith copies of documents Ex.O1 and closed evidence.

5. We have carefully gone through the record and also heard the learned counsels for the parties.

6. The impugned bill has already been withdrawn by the opposite parties as specifically pleaded in the written reply. This fact was not disputed by learned counsel for the complainant at the time of arguments. Learned counsel for the complainant contended that complainant is entitled to compensation and litigation expenses for deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties. On the other hand, it has been contended by learned counsel for the opposite parties that the opposite parties have already withdrawn the bill in dispute and as such there is no deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties and complaint is liable to be dismissed. We have carefully considered the above contentions advanced by learned counsels for the parties. The impugned bill is Ex.C1 on record. In this bill the meter reading is mentioned as 3872. The complainant moved an application Ex.C4 for checking of the reading of the meter and on his application, JE visited the spot and found the meter reading as 2846. This report of JE is mentioned on application Ex.C4 itself. So it clearly proves that impugned bill dated 28.8.2014 Ex.C1 was sent to the complainant with higher meter reading. It constitute deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties. The impugned bill was withdrawn by the opposite parties only after filing of the present complaint by the complainant. The JE made report regarding wrong reading of the meter on 10.9.2014 and whereas complainant has filed the present complaint on 15.10.2014 i.e after 35 days but in the mean while no action was taken by the opposite parties to rectify the bill in question. So it can not be said that complainant has filed the present complaint in haste as alleged by the opposite parties. So, in the above circumstances, the complainant is entitled to compensation and litigation expenses.

7. In view of above discussion, the present complaint is accepted and opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation and further Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Jyotsna Thatai Jaspal Singh Bhatia

07.05.2015 Member Member President