Order by
Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President
1. The complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 on the allegations that an electric connection bearing No.F23GC230001A has been installed in the premises of the complainant in the name of Radha Swami Satsang Ghar, Kot Ise Khan and the complainant has been running a Welfare Institution under PMKYY Program under the name and style of Shri Lal Dyal Skill Institute. The complainant is using the said connection since long and paying the consumer charges regularly and nothing is due against the said connection. The complainant alleges that he received a bill dated 18.11.2019 vide which the Opposite Parties raised a demand of Rs.72,120/- from the complainant which is altogether illegal, unjust void at law and is liable to be set aside as no proper notice of any kind has been issued before imposing the said amount. Moreover, the complainant has been condemned without heard and no opportunity has been provided to the complainant. The complainant further alleges that it is a domestic connection and the complainant never consumed the electricity to such extent. The complainant made so many requests to the Opposite Parties to set aside the said illegal demand raised vide bill dated 18.11.2019 which is altogether illegal, unwarranted unjust void and against the fundamental principle of law and same is liable to be set aside, but the Opposite Parties did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant and hence, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, the complainant has filed the instant complaint. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.
- To set aside the amount of Rs.72,120/- raised by the Opposite Parties illegally vide bill dated 18.11.2019 and also to pay Rs.50,000/- on account of compensation for causing him mental tension and harassment or any other relief which this Commission may deem fit and proper may be awarded to the complainant.
Hence, the complainant has filed the complaint for the redressal of his grievance .
2. Upon notice, Opposite Parties appeared and contested the complaint by filing written reply taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complaint is not maintainable. Actual facts are that the electric connection in dispute is installed in the premises of the complainant in the name of Radha Swami Satsang Ghar, Kot Ise Khan. Actual facts are that in the bill of November, 2019 reading of 9111 KVAH unit was shown because in 2018 the billing was done on the basis of KWH by the Opposite Parties and when this billing on KVAH was stated in 2018-2019 and then due to the non availability of accurate power factor, KVAH reading got increased and due to this, the bill of 9111 units KVAH was issued to the consumer and Rs.1,35,070/- is also arrears against the consumer in October month and in November, 2020 the consumer has made part payment and now Rs.89,020/- is still due and recoverable from the consumer, but the complainant has not disclosed this fact in the complaint and as such, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties and the present complaint is liable to be dismissed. On merits, the Opposite Parties took up the same and similar pleas as taken up by them in the preliminary objections. Remaining facts mentioned in the complaint are also denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint with cost was made.
3. In order to prove his case, complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C37 and closed his evidence.
4. On the other hand, to rebut the evidence of the complainant, the Opposite Parties tendered into evidence the affidavit of Sh.Baldev Singh SDO Ex.OP1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP5 and closed the evidence on behalf of the Opposite Parties.
5. We have heard the ld.counsel for the Parties and also gone through the evidence produced on record.
6. Ld.counsel for the complainant has mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint and contended that an electric connection bearing No.F23GC230001A has been installed in the premises of the complainant in the name of Radha Swami Satsang Ghar, Kot Ise Khan and the complainant has been running a Welfare Institution under PMKYY Program under the name and style of Shri Lal Dyal Skill Institute. The complainant is using the said connection since long and paying the consumer charges regularly and nothing is due against the said connection. Further contended that that he received a bill dated 18.11.2019 vide which the Opposite Parties raised a demand of Rs.72,120/- from the complainant which is altogether illegal, unjust void at law and is liable to be set aside as no proper notice of any kind has been issued before imposing the said amount. Moreover, the complainant has been condemned without heard and no opportunity has been provided to the complainant. The complainant further alleges that it is a domestic connection and the complainant never consumed the electricity to such extent. The complainant made so many requests to the Opposite Parties to set aside the said illegal demand raised vide bill dated 18.11.2019 which is altogether illegal, unwarranted unjust void and against the fundamental principle of law and same is liable to be set aside.
7. On the other hand, ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties has repelled the aforesaid contention of the ld.counsel for the complainant and contended that the electric connection in dispute is installed in the premises of the complainant in the name of Radha Swami Satsang Ghar, Kot Ise Khan. Actual facts are that in the bill of November, 2019 reading of 9111 KVAH unit was shown because in 2018 the billing was done on the basis of KWH by the Opposite Parties and when this billing on KVAH was stated in 2018-2019 and then due to the non availability of accurate power factor, KVAH reading got increased and due to this, the bill of 9111 units KVAH was issued to the consumer and Rs.1,35,070/- is also arrears against the consumer in October month and in November, 2020 the consumer has made part payment and now Rs.89,020/- is still due and recoverable from the consumer, but the complainant has not disclosed this fact in the complaint and as such, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.
8. The main plea raised by the ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties-Corporation is that in the bill of November, 2019 reading of 9111 KVAH unit was shown because in 2018 the billing was done on the basis of KWH by the Opposite Parties and when this billing on KVAH was stated in 2018-2019 and then due to the non availability of accurate power factor, KVAH reading got increased and due to this reason, the bill of 9111 units KVAH was issued to the consumer and Rs.1,35,070/- remains arrears against the consumer in October month and in November, 2020 the consumer has made part payment and now Rs.89,020/- is still due and recoverable from the consumer. But bare perusal of the consumption bills placed on record by the complainant itself shows that these bills are already sent to the complainant on the basis of reading of KVAH and not on the basis of KWH and this plea raised by the PSPCL can not be admitted as correct. During the course of arguments, Sh.Satnam Singh Revenue Accountant who remained present before this District Consumer Commission could not clarify this reason for charging such hefty amount from the complainant by calculating this reading wrongly and as such, we found that there is certainly deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties-Corporation while raising such hefty amount from the complainant in his consumption bill.
9. Ld.counsel for the complainant has further contended that due to the negligence and deficiency on the part of the officials of the Opposite Parties-Corporation, the complainant suffered huge loss for causing him mental tension and harassment and the complainant was compelled to file the present complaint for the redressal of his grievances after spending huge money on account of preparation of complaint and relevant documents as well as by paying counsel fee and on this count, he claimed Rs.50,000/- on account of compensation for causing him mental tension and harassment, but we are of the view that the claim for compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- appears to be exorbitant and excessive. The rationale behind grant of compensation has been to compensate a party of the loss occasioned by it. It is none of the intention of the legislature while legislating the Consumer Protection Act to enrich a particular party at the cost of the other. The compensation has to be awarded in commensuration with the loss occasioned to the complainant. In our considered view, ends of justice would be fully met if the complainant is awarded lump-sum compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- and we award the same accordingly.
10. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the demand of Rs.72,120/- raised by the Opposite Parties vide bill dated 18.11.2019 (Ex.C2) from the Complainant is set aside. The Opposite Parties-Corporation is directed to refund this amount of Rs.72,120/- to the complainant or to adjust the same in the future consumption bills of the complainant. Opposite Parties-Corporation is also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousands only) as lumpsum compensation to the complainant. However, the Complainant shall continue to pay the consumption charges regularly without any default in future as per actual consumption. Compliance of this order be made by the Opposite Parties within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the Complainant shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this Commission. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of cost. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
11. Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.
This complaint could not be decided within the prescribed period because the State Government has not appointed any of the Whole Time Members in this Commission for about 3 years i.e. w.e.f. 15.09.2018 till 27.08.2021 as well as the situation arising due to outbreak of the Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19).
Announced in Open Commission.
Dated: 08.03.2022.
