BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.227 of 2016

Date of Instt. 24.05.2016

Date of Decision: 14.11.2017

Vinod Khosla aged about 65 years son of Mool Raj Khosla resident of House No.451, Shastri Nagar, Basti Guzan, Ward No.42, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

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

2. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd through Assistant Executive Engineer Model Town, Jalandhar

3. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. Sub Divisional Office Model Town, Jalandhar.

..….…Opposite parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)

Sh. Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Sh. Kunal Kalia, Adv Counsel for the complainant.

Sh. DR Seth, Adv Counsel for OP No.1 to 3.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1. This complaint is filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that the complainant has one electricity connection in his residential house for domestic purpose bearing consumer No.J75BT460857W, which is used by the complainant and paying the bills to the OPs regularly. In the month of November, 2013 the electricity meter of the complainant was burnt and the complainant approached to OPs for change of electricity meter and on the request of the complainant, the OPs changed the electricity meter of the complainant. Thereafter, the said electric meter was not working in proper manner and electricity bill for the 12-15 days was Rs.12,000/- approximately and the complainant challenged the said electricity bill with the OPs after paying Rs.120/- on 13.11.2013. Thereafter, the OPs used to issue the bill of the electric connection of the complainant and the complainant has been regularly paying the electricity bill up till February, 2016.

2. In the first week of March, 2016, the complainant received a memo No.333 dated 02.03.2016 issued by the OP No.2 after the period of three years and they made the illegal demand of Rs.42,001/- from the complainant and directed the complainant to deposit the said amount within two days with the department of the OPs. After compelling the OPs, the complainant after making the arrangement of the funds, deposited part payment of Rs.30,000/- i.e. Rs.10,000/- on 22.03.2016 and Rs.20,000/- on 04.04.2016 under pretext with the right to challenge the said demand raised by the OPs. The OPs further issued bill of Rs.38,270/- out of demand of Rs.42,001/-, raised by the OPs is totally wrong, illegal, unlawful and unjustified from the complainant as the OPs have not issued any letter regarding any defect of the said meter for the period of three years as bare perusal from the letter that the meter was intact and no defect has been found in the same. The complainant approached the office of the OPs, but the OPs refused to relent or adjust the bill and asked the complainant to deposit the total amount, failing which the connection will be disconnected. The OPs issued a memo to the complainant for an amount of Rs.42,001/- as well as one electricity bill for an amount of Rs.38,270/-, the act of the OPs in charging the impugned amount is liable to be set aside. It is further submitted that the complainant has already been paying the regular consumption of the said meter from November, 2013 upto February 2016 and he has been regularly paying the electricity charges thereafter. The OPs have acted negligently and have resorted to unfair trade practice while performing their duties towards the complainant, who is the consumer of the OPs and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and the amount of Rs.42,001/- claimed in the memo dated 02.03.2016 and bill of Rs.38,270/- are liable to be waved of/deleted by the Forum. The complainant further prayed for grant of mental tension, agony and litigation expenses alongwith interest @ 18% as claimed above.

3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, who filed joint written reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable as the charges leveled are on account of actual consumption charges of the electricity consumed by the complainant as per reading. The complainant challenged the bill and meter was checked in the ME Lab and found to be OK as per ME Lab report dated 28.04.2015. The complainant has been making the part payments of the electricity bill and not made any payments of September, 2013 to March, 2014, December 2015, April 2016 and June 2016 as per Calculation Sheet. Due to the system of the computer, the data/billing is initially calculated at Patiala in routine and the bills are sent from the Sub-Division of the OPs and the closing balance of the complainant's account upto June 2016 is mentioned in the Calculation Sheet enclosed. The charges leveled are rightly and legally charged as per rules, regulations and instructions of the Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd, as such, there is no deficiency or negligence in service on the part of the OPs. It is further averred that the complainant does not have any cause of action against the OPs and even the complainant is estopped by his own act and conduct from filing the present complaint and even the complainant does not have any locus standi to file the present complaint and further alleged that this Forum does not have the jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide the present complaint. On merits, the installation of electric meter/connection in the house of the complainant is admitted and it is also admitted that the bill in question as well as memo was issued to the complainant for making a payment, but the remaining allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly prayed that the complaint of the complainant is without merits and the same may be dismissed.

4. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.CW1/A alongwith some documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C5 and then closed the evidence.

5. Similarly, counsel for the OPs tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.OP5 alongwith some documents Ex.OP1 to Ex.OP4 and closed the evidence.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also gone through the case file very minutely.

7. The main allegations of the complainant are that he has domestic electricity connection in his house and he used to pay consumption charges, but in the month of November 2013, the electric meter of the complainant was burnt and accordingly, he make a payment for change of the meter as well as checking of the meter and receipt of the same is Ex.C2 and thereafter, meter of the complainant was changed and then since 13.11.2013 upto February, 2016, the complainant has been regularly paying the consumption charges and even the consumption charges of thereafter, also regularly paying by the complainant, despite that the OP has issued a memo No.333 dated 02.03.2016 in the month of March, 2016 for depositing of Rs.42,001/- and under compelling circumstances, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.10,000/- on 22.03.2016 and Rs.20,000/- on 04.04.2016. In order to establish that the complainant has deposited the aforesaid amount of Rs.30,000/-, no receipt has been placed on the file but bank statement of the complainant Ex.C5 itself established the aforesaid amount of Rs.10,000/- as well as Rs.20,000/- have been deposited in the account of the SDO, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and further, the complainant has challenged the aforesaid memo No.333 dated 02.03.2016 Ex.C1, for demand of Rs.42,001/- as well as electricity bill Ex.C4 issued in the month of April 2016 for amounting to Rs.38,270/-, no doubt the OP has alleged that they have brought on the file Calculation Sheets Ex.OP2 and Ex.OP3 and whereby tried to establish that the consumption charges have been demanded from the complainant, but these calculation sheets did not depict the consumption of the complainant periodically and as such, we come to conclusion that the complainant himself not able to bring on the file any receipts, whereby he deposited the regular consumption charges from November, 2013 upto February, 2016. So, this version of the complainant is not established and as per detail given in the bill issued in the month of April, 2016 Ex.C4, arrears of Rs.27,653/- is added in the bill and consumption of the said period is 657 Unit and then calculated the total amount Rs.38,270/-. Here one thing is make a confusion that if the OP has issued a memo dated 02.03.2016 for amounting to Rs.42,001/- and thereafter, in the month of March i.e. on 22.03.2016, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.10,000/- and on 04.04.2016, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.20,000/- and these factum have not been denied by the OP and the said amount of Rs.30,000/-, which is deposited after the issuance of the memo dated 02.03.2016, but the said amount has not been adjusted in the next bill Ex.C4, which was issued in the month of April, 2016, wherein the previous arrears have been shown to Rs.27,657/-, if the already deposited amount of Rs.30,000/- is to be deducted from the amount mentioned in the memo Ex.C1, then there remains only Rs.12,001/-, though after adding late fee charges or any surrendery charges, the arrear may came to Rs.27,653/-, but it is not justified to issue a next bill without mentioning the amount of the memo i.e. Rs.42,001/-. So, accordingly, the OPs are directed to adjust the amount deposited by the complainant i.e. Rs.30,000/- in the amount of the bill Ex.C4 i.e. Rs.38,270/- and only remaining amount i.e. Rs.8270.20 be recovered from the complainant and other entire amount demanded through memo Ex.C1 and bill Ex.C4 is waived and set aside.

8. In the light of above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and OPs are directed to recover only consumption charges of Rs.8270/- out of the total amount as mentioned in the bill Ex.C4 Rs.38,270/-, after deducting the already deposited amount of Rs.30,000/- by the complainant and further OPs are directed to pay compensation to the complainant for harassment to the tune of Rs.5000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.2000/-. The entire compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of order. The complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

9. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Karnail Singh

14.11.2017 Member President