DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 216 of 21.6.2018

                                      Decided on:   31.5.2019

Avtar Singh aged 50 years s/o Balwant Singh s/o Waryam Singh, resident of Anand Colony, Malkana Patti, Samana, District Patiala.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1.       Punjab State Power Corp. Ltd., The Mall, Patiala through its Chairman.

2.       Assistant Executive Engineer, Punjab State Power Corp. Ltd. Sub Division Urban Samana, Patiala.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                      Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

                                      Sh. M.P.Singh Pahwa, President

                                      Smt. Inderjeet Kaur, Member

                                      Sh.B.S.Dhaliwal, Member      

ARGUED BY

                                      Sh.Asheen Khan, counsel for the complainant.

                                      Sh.P.S.Walia, counsel for the OPs.  

ORDER

                                    SH. M.P.SINGH PAHWA,PRESIDENT

1. This is the complaint filed by Avtar Singh (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against Punjab State Power Corp. Ltd. and another (hereinafter referred to as the OP/s).
2. Briefly the case of the complainant is that an electric connection bearing account No.P62CF391352 as DS connection is installed at his residence in the name of his father Balwant Singh. Balwant Singh  has died in the year 2008.After his death, complainant is regularly paying the electricity charges. He is consumer as defined under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act.
3. It  is alleged that total sanctioned load in the premises is 1.410.Complainant  has been regularly paying the bills except the disputed bill.The status of the meter in the bill shows  as OK.
4. As per the complainant, he has received bill dated 31.5.2018 pertaining to the period 2.4.2018 to 31.5.2018.Total consumption during this period was 459 units but the complainant was surprised to see the bill of Rs.1,38,570/- including current cycle charges of Rs.2661/-, adjustment  of Rs.1277/-, sundry charges of Rs.1,31,436/-, previous financial year arrear Rs.1039/-, arrears of current financial year Rs.1189/-. Complainant immediately approached OP No.2 and showed the bill, who assured to rectify the bill according to the consumption of the use of electricity and issued new correct bill.
5. It is alleged that at the time of changing of the meter, the OPs never packed the meter in the cardboard box in the presence of the complainant  and never put the signatures on the fixed seal.
6. It is alleged that the OPs have no right to charge sundry charges and any previous arrears without mentioning in the bill. As per the provisions of the Act of PSPCL, a separate notice should be sent by the OPs to the complainant to recover the sundry charges , if any. The act of the OPs is against the principal of natural justice and amounts to unfair trade practice.
7. On this background of the facts, the complainant has prayed for direction to the OPs to rectify the bill dated 31.5.2018, to pay Rs.1lac as compensation and Rs.10,000/-as costs of the litigation. Hence this complaint.
8. Upon notice OPs appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing the written reply. In reply the OPs admitted that the electric connection in question is installed at the residence of the complainant in the name of his father Balwant Singh. The issuance of the bill dated 31.5.2018 is also admitted but it is denied that the OPs assured to rectify the bill according to the consumption of the electricity and sent new bill.
9. As per OPs the complainant was having one electric connection .The account number of the connection was P62SP620246. It was permanently disconnected due to non-payment of electricity bills amounting to Rs.1,36,436/-. The amount was transferred in the account in question which is being used by the complainant and has been paying the electricity charges as per averments. The complainant was duly made to understand the details of the bill in question. The amount shown as sundry charges is the arrears of electricity bill of the other electric connection of Balwant Singh. After controverting  other averments, the OPs prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
10. The parties were afforded opportunity to produce their evidence.
11. The complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit, Ex.CA, copy of death certificate, Ex.C1, copy of Aadhar card, Ex.C2, copies of bills,Exs.C3 to C6,  receipts, Exs.C7 and C8.
12. The OPs tendered into evidence affidavit of Er.Ravinder Singh, Ex.OPA, copy of disconnection order,Ex.OP1, copy of customer interaction center, showing the address of the consumer,Ex.OP2, copy of account detail, Ex.OP3, copy of noting regarding transfer of the amount,Ex.OP4 and copy of noting dated 13.4.2018,Ex.OP5 and closed the evidence.
13. We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case file.
14. The ld. counsel for the parties have reiterated their stand as taken in their respective pleadings. We have carefully considered their submissions.
15. The complainant has disputed the demand of Rs.1,31,436/- raised by the OPs as sundry charges vide bill dated 31.5.2018(x.C6). The complainant has produced on record previous bills dated 2.4.2018, Ex.C6, 3.2.2018(Ex.C4) and 29.11.2017(Ex.C3). A perusal of these bills reveal that there was no demand of any charges other than consumption charges. Therefore, it is to be accepted that the demand of Rs. 1,31,436/- has been raised by the OPs for the first time vide bill dated 31.5.2018.
16. In written version also the OPs have pleaded that another connection was permanently disconnected due to non payment of electricity bills amounting to Rs.1,31,436/- and this amount has been transferred in the account in question.
17. It is not the case of the OPs that any show cause notice was issued to the complainant before claiming this amount of Rs. 1,31,436/- with the reasons for claiming this amount. It is to be inferred that the OPs have claimed this amount without any notice to the complainant. Regulation No.30.1.2 of The Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters), Regulations, 2014 (for short Supply code,2014), deals with the electricity bills. For the sake of convenience  this regulation is being reproduced as under:                                                                                                                                          30.1.2 The bill-cum-notice for arrears in the case of under assessment or the charges levied as a result of checking etc. shall be initially tendered separately and shall not be clubbed with the current electricity bill. The arrear bill cum notice would briefly indicate the nature and period of the arrears alongwith calculation details of such arrears. If the arrears are not cleared by the consumer such arrears shall be indicated regularly in the subsequent electricity bills. However, in case arrear bill is included in the current energy bill at the first instance, the distribution licensee shall not be entitled to take any punitive action against the consumer for non-payment of such arrear amount along with the current energy bill.
18. A perusal of aforesaid regulation reveal that the separate bill-cum-notice for arrear of charges other than consumption charges is to be initially tendered separately and not to be clubbed with the current electricity bill. The arrear bill cum notice is also to briefly indicate the nature and period of the arrears alongwith calculation details of such arrears and if the arrears are not cleared only then these are to be indicated regularly in the subsequent electricity bills.
19. Therefore, it is to be held that the demand of Rs.1,31,436/-  through current bill of May,2018 is without compliance of the provisions of aforesaid regulation. As such the demand is not sustainable.
20. For the reason recorded above, the complaint is partly accepted. The OPs are directed to rectify the bill dated 31.5.2018 and then issue the same afresh.The OPs are also burdened with costs of Rs.5000/-. However, it is made clear that the OPs are at liberty to proceed regarding other demand if any as per rules and regulations. Compliance of the order be made by the OPs within 45 days from the date of the receipt of certified copy of this order.
21.  Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost under the Rules. Thereafter, file be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

ANNOUNCED

DATED:31.5.2019       

 B.S.Dhaliwal                         Inderjeet Kaur              M. P. Singh Pahwa

       Member                                 Member                                      President