DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA.

CC.No. 234 of 16-05-2012

Decided on 24-08-2012

Darbara Singh, aged about 42 years, son of Surjit Singh, resident of Village Bhucho Kalan, Tehsil & District Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

1.Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall, Patiala, through its C.M.D.

2.Sub Divisional Officer, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Sub Division, Bhucho Mandi, District Bathinda.

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.

Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member.

Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member.

Present:-

For the Complainant: Sh.A.S Shergil, counsel for complainant.

For Opposite parties: Sh.R.D Goyal, counsel for opposite parties.

ORDER

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant has obtained the SP electricity connection for running Atta Chakki for earning his livelihood. The electricity connection bearing account No.BP 25/9 is installed in his premises. The complainant has been using the abovesaid electricity connection bonafidely and has been paying all the bills of the consumption issued by the opposite parties from time to time and there has been no default in the payment of the bills. The average consumption of the complainant remained very nominal. The opposite parties issued him a memo No.864 dated 18.4.2012 raising a demand of Rs.18,268/- on account of theft of the electricity alleging therein that the meter No.223364 installed in his premises was checked by the officials of the opposite parties in the ME Lab on 16.4.2012 and it was found that one phase of the said meter is lying dead. The complainant moved an application to the opposite party No.2 after receiving the impugned notice/memo with a request that nothing is due against the complainant and he is not liable to pay any amount. The opposite parties again issued notice/memo No.970 dated 30.4.2012 for the demand of Rs.18,268/-. The complainant has assailed this demand on various grounds. The meter in question was never checked by the officials of the opposite parties in his presence, the complainant has not signed the said report. The meter is installed in a duly sealed MCB and it is beyond the reach of the complainant. Even the opposite parties have admitted that the notice/memo No.970 dated 30.4.2012 the ME seals of the meter were intact and since there is no tempering with the ME seals, it cannot be said that there is any liability of the complainant if the phase of the meter was lying dead. The officials of the opposite parties visited the premises of the complainant every month for recording the reading of the meter but no adverse remark has been reported rather the code 'O' has been recorded in all the bills so issued by the opposite parties from time to time, the copy of the alleged checking report is neither supplied to the complainant nor the opposite parties provided any opportunity to him of being heard before raising the alleged demand and the opposite parties could not raise the demand for the period of 6 months without any reasons and without any fault on the part of the complainant. Hence, the complainant has filed the present complaint for seeking the directions of this Forum to the opposite parties to withdraw the impugned demand raised by the opposite parties vide memos No.864 dated 18.4.2012 and 970 dated 30.4.2012 for Rs.18,268/- alongwith cost and compensation.

2. The notice was issued to the opposite parties. The opposite parties after appearing before this Forum have filed their joint written statement and have pleaded that the connection No.BP25/009 has been issued for SP category and the complainant is using the said connection for running Atta Chakki on high scale. He is not consumer under the 'Act'. The complainant is defaulter in paying the bills to the opposite parties. The opposite parties pleaded that his average consumption remained nominal. The connection of the complainant has been checked on 24.3.2012 by the Sr.XEN alongwith A.A.E Enforcement Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd, Bathinda in the presence of the complainant who signed the checking report after receiving the copy of the same. At the time of checking, it was found that when the meter was checked on heater load, Pulse on Red Phase was much less than yellow and blue phase and it was also stated at the time of checking that the meter of the complainant be removed and packed in his presence and this meter be checked in the ME Lab in the presence of the consumer. The meter was changed vide MCO dated 4.4.2012 and notice bearing memo No.728 dated 9.4.2012 was issued to the complainant to be present in the M.E Lab on 16.4.2012. In this notice three dates were given i.e. 16.4.2012, 23.4.2012 and 30.4.2012. This notice was received by the complainant and duly signed by him. The meter was checked on 16.4.2012 in the presence of the complainant and it was found that the Red Phase of the meter is dead. On the basis of the said checking report, the account of the complainant was overhauled regarding previous six months and the memo No.864 dated 18.4.2012 was issued to him for depositing the amount of Rs.18,268/- and the reminder No.970 dated 30.4.2012 was issued to the complainant. The complainant did not raise any objection regarding the contents of the checking report. When the meter was installed, it was accurate and was installed for the entire satisfaction of the complainant, the meter reader only takes the reading but he does not know the technicalities of the meter. The demand raised by the opposite parties is legal and valid as per rules and regulations of Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. As such, the complainant is bound to deposit the amount as demanded in the abovesaid memos. The complainant is not consumer of the opposite parties.

3. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

4. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.

5. The contention of the complainant is that he has received a memo No.864 dated 18.4.2012 for a demand of Rs.18,268/- on the basis of checking done by the officials of the opposite parties in the premises of the complainant. The complainant submitted that the said checking was not done in his presence nor he has signed the said checking report. The demand is raised on the basis that one phase of the meter was lying dead. The complainant has assailed the demand on the various grounds. A reminder notice dated 30.4.2012 was also issued to the complainant.

6. The opposite parties on the other hand submitted that the meter was checked in the presence of the complainant. The checking was conducted on 24.3.2012 by the Sr. XEN alongwith A.A.E Enforcement Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd, Bathinda in the presence of the complainant who has signed the checking report after receiving the copy of the same. At the time of checking, it was found that when the meter was checked on heater load, Pulse on Red Phase was very less than yellow and blue phase. The meter of the complainant was removed and packed in his presence and the same was checked in the ME Lab in his presence. The meter was changed vide MCO dated 4.4.2012 and notice bearing memo No.728 dated 9.4.2012 was issued to the complainant to be present in the M.E Lab on 16.4.2012 and it was also stated in this notice that if the complainant fails to appear on 16.4.2012 then the meter will be checked on 23.4.2012 and if he again fails to appear in ME Lab then it will be checked on 30.4.2012. This notice was duly received by the complainant and signed by him. The meter was checked on 16.4.2012 in the presence of the complainant and it was found that the Red Phase of the meter was dead. On the basis of the said checking report, the account of the complainant was overhauled regarding the previous six months and memo No.864 dated 18.4.2012 was issued to him for depositing the amount of Rs.18,268/-. The reminder No.970 dated 30.4.2012 was issued to the complainant.

7. A perusal of documents placed on file shows that Ex.C2 Memo No.970 dated 30.4.2012 was issued to the complainant. In this memo, it has specifically mentioned that the meter of the complainant was checked and seals were found intact and one phase of the meter was dead. As such, as per regulation No.21.4(g), the account of the complainant is overhauled and the remaining amount is to be recovered. Vide memo No.864 dated 18.4.2012 vide Ex.C3 all the calculations were sent to the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant has written a letter to the opposite parties in which he has written that the defect reported in the checking report is 2 days old only but the recovery is for last 6 months, so kindly convey him the exact time when this technical fault occurred in his meter. Er. Gagandeep Singh, SDO, DS Sub Division Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. has deposed in his affidavit Ex.R1 that the complainant is defaulter in paying the bills. The average consumption of the meter remained nominal. The connection has been checked on 24.3.2012 by the Sr.Executive Engineer alongwith the A.E.E Enforcement Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. in the presence of the complainant who signed the checking report after receiving the copy of the same. This version of the opposite parties is true vide Ex.R4, the checking report bears the signature of the complainant and all the facts regarding the meter of the complainant has been recorded in the checking report in Ex.R5. At the time of checking, it was found that when the meter was checked on heater load, Pulse on Red Phase was very less than yellow and blue phase and it was also stated at the time of checking that the meter of the complainant be removed and packed in his presence and the same was checked in the ME Lab in the presence of the complainant. The meter was changed on 4.4.2012 and notice bearing memo No.728 dated 9.4.2012 was issued to the complainant to be present in the M.E Lab on 16.4.2012, 23.4.2012 and 30.4.2012 and the meter was checked on 16.4.2012 in his presence. The notice was sent by the opposite parties to the complainant was also received by Darbara Singh complainant vide Ex.R6. After checking of the meter, the report has been given vide Ex.R7 the meter result shows -33.42 which reveals that the R Phase of the meter was dead. So, according to this checking report, the demand was raised but the complainant has failed to deposit the demanded amount.

8. Thus from the facts, circumstances and evidence placed on file it is concluded that one phase (Red Phase) of the meter was dead and the demand was raised after getting the meter checked in the ME Lab. In the ME Lab it was found that the meter was running slow and the demand was raised as per the rules and regulations of the opposite parties. The complainant has already deposited the amount of Rs.6,100/- vide receipt No.63 vide order dated 18.5.2012. Thus, the complainant is liable to deposit the remaining amount to the opposite parties.

9. Thus, in view of what has been discussed above, there is no deficiency on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, this complaint fails and is hereby dismissed without any order as to cost.

10. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced in open Forum:-

24-08-2012 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)

President

(Amarjeet Paul)

Member

(Sukhwinder Kaur)

Member