BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.20 of 2019
Date of Instt. 17.01.2019
Date of Decision: 22.06.2021
Ruby Devi aged about 40 years wife of Shri Rajneeti Mehta, resident of H. No.109-110, New Raja Garden, Mithapur, Jalandhar.
….. Complainant
Versus
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall, Patiala through its Chairman.
The Assistant Executive Engineer, Model Town Commercial Sub-Division, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Jalandhar.
..…Opposite parties
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Sh. Kuljit Singh (President)
Smt. Jyotsna (Member)
Present: Sh. Jatinder Sharma, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.
OPs No.1 & 2 exparte.
Order
Kuljit Singh (President)
1. The present complaint has been filed by complainant against the OPs on the averments that an electric connection bearing account No.3001521200 is installed in the house in the name of complainant, hence, the complainant is consuming the electricity. The complainant being consumer of said electricity connection had been regularly paying electricity bills to the OPs from time to time as per actual consumption. On 28.05.2016, the technical staff of the OPs came to the house of the complainant and asked her that the electricity meter installed in her name to be changed with a new electricity meter and later the same was changed by the OPs. That after the installation of new electricity meter the complainant was shocked to receive a bill amounting to Rs.88,630/- on 09.09.2017. The complainant after receiving said bill approached OP No.2 for getting the clarification regarding above said bill, but no satisfactory reply has been given to her, rather she was asked to deposit the amount of Rs.10,000/- and the she was assured that they will change the electricity meter. Thereafter, another bill amounting to Rs.81,710/- was received by the complainant on 12.11.2017, she after receiving said bill approached OP No.2 for getting the clarification regarding above said bill, but no satisfactory reply has been given to her. That thereafter, the complainant moved a complaint to Deputy Chief Engineer, Shakti Sadan, Jalandhar dated 09.02.2018, but all in vain. The complainant inspite of moving the complaint for changing the electricity meter which is running too fast, she is still receiving bills on the higher side, the details of which are as under:-
11.03.2018 Rs.90,390/-
30.07.2018 Rs.86,090/-
14.11.2018 Rs.1,08,010/-
2. The complainant time and again approached the OPs and also deposited advance payments of Rs.20,000/- on dated 14.03.2018, Rs.5000/- on 11.04.2018, Rs.9500/- on 05.06.2018 and Rs.5000/- on 10.01.2019 with the OPs as directed by the OPs and every time the OP No.2 assured the complainant that to change the electricity meter with a new one but all in vain. On 10.01.2019, the complainant visited the office of OP No.2 and requested the official concerned of OP No.2 to change the electricity meter with a new one as the same is running too fast and also requested the OPs that she is a poor lady and will pay the electricity bill as per actual consumption of the previous years for the same period, to which the OPs refused and threatened the complainant to either deposit Rs.5000/- or they shall disconnect the electricity connection of the complainant. She voluntarily deposited Rs.5000/- under protest with the OPs. That the demand of Rs.1,08,010/- is illegal, null and void. She is not liable to pay any amount as alleged. The act of the OPs is totally wrong, illegal, unlawful, incorrect and is not binding upon the complainant. That the demand of the OP No.2 is illegal as no notice was ever served upon the complainant and no personal hearing was ever given to the complainant. The complainant rushed to the OP No.2 and asked reason for this illegal demand, then OP No.2 told that can do nothing and if the she failed to make the payment of the bill amount, they will disconnect the electricity meter of the complainant. OP No.2 is threatening the complainant either to deposit the amount or to face the disconnection of the electricity supply. These threatening have cast clouds over the legal rights of the complainant. The complainant has got no other efficacious remedy except to file the present complaint and as such, the present complaint filed with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to set-aside the demand of Rs.1,08,010/- being illegal, null and void and further OPs be directed to pay Rs.25,000/- for deficiency in service and as damages on account of mental tension, harassment suffered by the complainant due tot the negligence of OPs and further OPs be directed to pay Rs.11,000/- as cost of the present litigation.
3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, but despite service both the OPs did not come present and ultimately, both the OPs were proceeded against exparte.
4. In order to prove her respective version, the complainant produced on the file her evidence at the time of filing the case.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the case file very carefully.
6. The complainant tendered in evidence Ex.C-1 is copy of bill dated 09.09.2017 for payment of Rs.88630/- . Ex.C-2 is copy of receipt of Rs.10,000/- . Ex.C-3 is copy of letter addressed to Deputy Chief Engineer Shakti Sadan, Jalandhar. Ex.C-4 to Ex.C-7 are copies of bills of different dates for different amounts. Ex.C-8 is copy of receipt. Ex.C-9 is copy of payment receipt of Rs.5000/-. Ex.C-10 is payment receipt of Rs.9500/- . Ex.C-11 is copy of payment receipt of Rs.5000/- . On the other hand, OPs proceeded against exparte, as such, they have not produced any document in support of their case.
7. The complainant is subscriber of OPs having electric connection bearing no. 3001521200 and had been regularly paying electricity bills to OPs time to time. He alleged that on 28.05.2016 the technical staff of OPs came to his house and asked him the electric meter installed in his name to be changed with a new meter and later on same was changed the same. After installation of new meter, the complainant was shocked to receive a bill amounting to Rs.88,630/- on 09.09.2017. The complainant after receiving the said bill approached OP no.2 for getting the clarification, but no satisfactory reply has been given to him rather he was asked to deposit the amount of Rs.10,000/-. Thereafter, another bill amounting to Rs.81,710/- was received by him on 12.11.2017, the meter running too fast. The complainant approached OPs and deposited advance payment of Rs.20,000/- on 14.03.2018, Rs.5000/- on 11.04.2018, Rs.9500/- on 05.06.2018 and Rs.5000/- on 10.01.2019 with OPs as directed by OPs. On 10.01.2019, complainant visited the office of OP no.2 and requested the official concerned of OP no.2 to change the electricity meter with new one. The complainant voluntarily deposited Rs.5000/- under protest with OPs. The demand of Rs.1,08,010/- is illegal, null and void.
8. On the other hand, OPs proceeded against exparte in the present case. OPs have not produced any document in support of their case. We have perused the entire record of the case and pleadings of the complainant. The bill amounting to Rs.88,630/- of 09.09.2017 is not correct rather complainant was asked to deposit Rs.10,000/- and he was assured that they will change the electricity meter. Thereafter, another bill amounting to Rs.81,710/- was received by the complainant on 12.11.2017. The complainant after receiving said bill approached OP no.2 for getting the clarification regarding above said bill but no satisfactory reply has been given to him. The complainant time and again approached OPs and deposited advance payments of Rs.20,000/- on 14.03.2018, Rs.5000/- on 11.04.2018, Rs.9500/- on 05.06.2018 and Rs.5000/- on 10.01.2019. The complainant in spite of moving the complaint for changing the electricity meter which is running too fast. The bill dated 14.11.2018 for payment of Rs.1,08,010/- is not correct as per actual consumption.
9. The complainant deposited the payment from time to time with OPs, this fact is clear from receipts Ex.C-2 for payment of Rs.10,000/-. Ex.C-8 is copy of receipt for payment of Rs.20,000/- Ex.C-9 for payment of Rs.5000/-, Ex.C-10 is receipt for payment of Rs.9500/- Ex.C-11 is receipt for payment of Rs.5000/- But OPs issued bills to complainant not as per actual consumption consumer by her.
10. The OPs have not produced any document in support of their case, they are proceeded against exparte by this Commission despite service. From perusal of entire record on the file, we are of the considered view that the demand of Rs.1,08,010/- is not correct and not as per actual consumption consumed by the complainant. The complainant approached OPs many times for changing the electricity meter, which is running too fast. The complainant deposited the electricity bills to OPs as per their demand. OPs also assured the complainant they will change the electricity meter with new one but all in vain. Ex.C-1 is electricity bill dated 09.09.2017 amounting to Rs.88,630/-. Ex.C-5 is electricity bill dated 11.03.2018 for payment of Rs.90,390/-, Ex.C-6 is electricity bill dated 16.07.2018 for payment of Rs.86,090/-, Ex.C-7 is electricity bill dated 14.11.2018 for payment of Rs.108010/- in which consumption is very too much. This is the disputed bill in the case in hand. We opined that the OPs illegally issued this bill to the complainant.
11. In the light of our above detailed discussion, we allow the complaint of the complainant and quash/set aside the demand of Rs.1,08,010/- which has been raised by the OPs from the complainant, which is illegal. Further OPs are also directed to adjust 50% of the disputed amount in future consumption bills respectively, which was paid by complainant during lis pendece of this complaint if any.
12. The compliance of the order be made within 45 days from receipt of copy of this order. Copies of the order be sent to the parties, as permissible, under the rules. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work and spread of Covid-19.
13. File be indexed and consigned to the record room after its due compliance.
Announced in open Commission
22nd of June 2021
Kuljit Singh
(President)
Jyotsna
(Member)
