Punjab

Moga

CC/2/2020

Sandeep Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Tarang chorpa

22 Feb 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLEX,
ROOM NOS. B209-B214, BEAS BLOCK, MOGA
 
Complaint Case No. CC/2/2020
( Date of Filing : 14 Jan 2020 )
 
1. Sandeep Kumar
s/o Banarsi Dass r/o Barnala Road, Opp. Dr. Harmesh Garg, Nihal Singh Wala, Teh. Nihal Singh Wala, Distt. Moga
Moga
Punjab
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd
through its Secretary, The Mall, Patiala.
Patiala
punjab
2. Senior Executive Engineer,
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd, Baghapurana.
Moga
Punjab
3. S.D.O.
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd, Patto Hira Singh Dist. Moga
Moga
Punjab
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu PRESIDENT
  Sh. Mohinder Singh Brar MEMBER
  Smt. Aparana Kundi MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Sh. Tarang chorpa, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 Sh.S.K.Dhir, Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 22 Feb 2022
Final Order / Judgement

 

 

Order by

Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President

1.       The  complainant  has filed the instant complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (now section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019) on the allegations that an electric connection bearing No.F13NC651821K is installed in the premises of the complainant and he is using the said connection since long and paying the consumer charges regularly. The complainant alleges that he received a bill dated 04.12.2019 from the Opposite Parties vide which the Opposite Parties raised a demand of Rs.97,094/- 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. In the said bill, there is consumption of only 389 units and the sum of Rs.91,623/- has been added on account of arrears, but the complainant never used 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 04.12.2019 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.

  1. To set aside the amount of Rs.97,094/- raised by the Opposite Parties illegally vide bill dated 04.12.2019 and also to pay  Rs.20,000/- 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 in the name of complainant is having sanctioned load of 7.00 KW and it is used for NRS (non residential purposes). The meter installed at the premises of the complainant   became defective and same was changed vide MCO No. 106/515. The bill for the month of 12/2018 was issued as per the status ‘C’ code and bills for the month of 4/2018 to 12/2018 were issued on Nil consumption. Thereafter, the audit party  vide half margin No. 244 dated 08/2019 claimed an amount of Rs.91,503/- on account of overhaul the account from 04/2018 to 12/2018 as per the consumption of previous year. Thereafter, due notice was issued to the complainant regarding depositing the said amount, but the complainant did not pay the same and hence the impugned amount was added in the bill in dispute to which the complainant is legally liable to pay the same 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 and Ex.C3 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.Jagtar Singh, ASP Ex.OPs1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.OPs2 to Ex.Ops12 and closed the evidence on behalf of the Opposite Parties.

5.       We have heard the complainant and ld.counsel for the Opposite 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.F13NC651821K is installed in the premises of the complainant and he is using the said connection since long and paying the consumer charges regularly. Further contended  that he received a bill dated 04.12.2019 from the Opposite Parties vide which the Opposite Parties raised a demand of Rs.97,094/- 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. Further pleaded that it is a domestic connection and the complainant never consumed the electricity to such extent. In the said bill, there is consumption of only 389 units and the sum of Rs.91,623/- has been added on account of arrears, but the complainant never used 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 04.12.2019 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.

7.       On the other hand, ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties has repelled the aforesaid contention of the complainant on the ground that  the electric connection in dispute in the name of complainant is having sanctioned load of 7 KW and it is used for NRS (non residential purposes). The meter installed at the premises of the complainant   became defective and same was changed vide MCO No. 106/515. The bill for the month of 12/2018 was issued as per the status ‘C’ code and bills for the month of 4/2018 to 12/2018 were issued on Nil consumption. Thereafter, the audit party  vide half margin No. 244 dated 08/2019 claimed an amount of Rs.91,503/- on account of overhaul the account from 04/2018 to 12/2018 as per the consumption of previous year. Thereafter, due notice was issued to the complainant regarding depositing the said amount, but the complainant did not pay the same and hence the impugned amount was added in the bill in dispute to which the complainant is legally liable to pay the same and the present complaint is liable to be dismissed.

8.       It is not disputed that the connection in dispute is NRS connection having sanctioned load of 7.00 KW. It is also not denied that the meter installed on the said connection became defective and same was replaced vide MCO No. 106/515. The bill for the month of 12/2018 was issued as per the status ‘C’ code and bills for the month of 4/2018 to 12/2018 were issued on Nil consumption. Thereafter, the audit party  vide half margin No. 244 dated 08/2019 claimed an amount of Rs.91,503/- on account of overhaul the account from 04/2018 to 12/2018 as per the consumption of previous year. Copy of half margin is placed on record as Ex.OPs2 It is also not denied that  the consumption bill to the ccomplainant for the period 4/2018 to 12/2018 has not been sent due to defective meter.  In such a situation, Regulation 21.5.1 of Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters Regulations (as notified by Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission vide notification No.PSERC/Secy./Reg.97 dated November 5, 2014 and published in Govt. of Punjab Gazette(Extra) dated November 5, 2014) provides that on account of Inaccurate Metersthe  accounts of a consumer shall be overhauled/ billed for the period meter remained defective/ dead stop subject to maximum period of six months  and the procedure for overhauling the account of the consumer shall be on the basis of energy consumption of corresponding period of previous year. In case the consumption of corresponding period of  the previous year is not available, the average monthly consumption of previous six months during which the meter was functional, shall be adopted for overhauling of accounts. If neither the consumption of corresponding period of previous year nor for the last six months is available then average of the consumption for the period the meter worked correctly during the last six months shall be taken for overhauling the account of the consumer. Where, the consumption of the previous months/ period as referred in para (a) to para (c) is not available,  the consumer shall be tentatively billed on the basis of consumption assessed as per para-4 of Annexure-8 and subsequently adjusted on the basis of actual consumption recorded in the corresponding period of the succeeding year. In the instant case, vide half margin No. 244, the account of the complainant was rightly overhauled taking the consumption of corresponding period of previous year and hence, we are of the view that the Opposite Parties have rightly charged the complainant by taking the average of corresponding period of previous year as per the aforesaid regulations of the PSPCL. 

9.       In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case,  since the account of the complainant was rightly overhauled as per the supra regulation of the PSPCL, this District Consumer Commission finds no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties-Corporation and hence, the instant complaint stands dismissed.   However, keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left  to bear their own costs.  Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

10.     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: 22.02.2022.

       

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                   

 
 
[ Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ Sh. Mohinder Singh Brar]
MEMBER
 
 
[ Smt. Aparana Kundi]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.