Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/406/2014

Sukhdev Singh S/o Kirpal Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

S.D.O. op.Sub Divison .no.1(UHBVNL) - Opp.Party(s)

Pankaj Jain

21 Mar 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR AT JAGADHRI.

                                                                                    Complaint No. 406 of 2014.

                                                                                    Date of institution: 22.09.2014.

                                                                                    Date of decision: 21.03.2017.

Sukhdev Singh aged about 45 years son of Sh. Kirpal Singh, resident of village Mandeber, Yamuna Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.                                                                                           

                                                                                                               …Complainant.

                                    Versus

1. The S.D.O. OP Sub Division No.1, (U.H.B.V.N.L) Yamuna Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar. 
2. XEN, Op. Division, UHBVNL, Yamuna Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar.  
3. Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., Sector-6, Shakti Bhawan, Panchkula, through its M.D.  

 

                                                                                                   … Respondents.

BEFORE:       SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: Sh. Pankaj Jain, Advocate, counsel for complainant.

              Sh. Dharamvir Singh, Advocate, counsel for respondents.

 

ORDER (ASHOK KUMAR GARG PRESIDENT)

 

1.                    Complainant  Sukhdev Singh has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection 1986. 

2.                    Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that the complainant was having an electricity connection at his premises at village Joriyon bearing account No. Y41YY19131M-T and connected load was 7.1 KW and he was paying the electricity bills regularly. The complainant had given an application on dated 21.05.2010 for reducing the electricity load from 7.1 KW to 1 KW to the OPs Nigam and Op No.1 had issued a receipt bearing No. 55 dated 24.05.2010. The complainant had paid the last electricity bill bearing No. 4456 of Rs. 1697/- on dated 21.05.2010. Thereafter, the load of the said connection was reduced from 7.1 KW to 1 KW. Despite reducing the electricity load, the OPs Nigam continued to issue the electricity bills on the basis of old load i.e. 7.1 KW wrongly and illegally, upon which complainant had given a written application for checking the meter and also requested them to correct the bill as per actual consumption and load of 1 KW. After that, the official of the OPs Nigam checked the electricity meter and found that the meter was in working condition and O.K. They also found and assessed the load less than as 1 KW. Due to wrong bills, the complainant could not pay the same after May, 2010. It has been further mentioned that now the OPs Nigam have sent a wrong bill No 4944 dated 10.09.2014 showing a huge amount of Rs. 49,384/- including fix charges. Upon which, complainant visited the officials of the OPs Nigam and requested them to make the necessary corrections in the said bill by deleting the said wrong amount but the official of the OPs Nigam refused to do the same. Lastly, it has been prayed that the OPs be directed to issue correct bills as per load of 1 KW from May 2010 to till today and to treat the bill dated 10.09.2014 issued by the OPs Nigam as wrong and illegal and also requested for directing the OPs not to disconnect the electricity connection and to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses. Hence, this complaint.

3.                     Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed its written statement. Besides preliminary objections stated on merit that complainant had an electricity connection having with the load of 7.1 KW but the complainant has not deposited any single penny towards the consumption charges since April, 2010. However, it is admitted that on the application of the complainant the load of the complainant was reduced from 7.1 KW to 1 KW in the month of May, 2010. The bills have been sent to the complainant as per meter reading and consumption but the complainant did not pay any single penny since April 2010. Further it has been mentioned that if any bill amount will be adjustable, the same will be adjusted as per instructions of the Nigam. Further the impugned bill No. 4944 dated 10.09.2014 has been correctly issued as per meter reading. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint.

4.                     In support of the case, complainant tendered into evidence his short affidavit as Annexure CW/A and documents such as Photo copy of application written to SDO regarding checking of meter as Annexure C-1, Photo copy of payment made with application as well as certificate of site verification as Annexure C-2, Photo copy of report of Chanderpal Singh Lineman as Annexure C-3, Application made to SDO for correction in bill as Annexure C-4, Electricity bill dated 09.05.2010 as Annexure C-5, Receipt of Rs. 100/- as Annexure C-6, Receipt dated 21.05.2010 of electricity bill as Annexure C-7, Photo copy of disconnection order as Annexure C-8, Electricity bills for various dates as Annexure C-9 to C-16 and closed his evidence.

5.                     On the other hand, counsel for the OPs tendered into evidence affidavit of Subhash Pannu SDO as Annexure RW/A and document such as Photo copy of ledger as Annexure R-1 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.

6.                     We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file very minutely and carefully.

7.                     It is not disputed that complainant was having an electricity connection bearing account No. Y42YY19131M-T and the connected load was 7.1 KW. it is also not disputed that complainant applied for reducing  the load from 7.1 KW to 1 Kw to the OPs which was duly received by the OPs Nigam vide No. 55 dated 24.05.2010 which is duly evident from the Annexure C-2. It is also not disputed that complainant deposited Rs. 10/- on this account which is also duly evident from Annexure C-2. It is also not disputed that Ops Nigam reduced the connected load of the complainant in the month of May, 2010 as this fact has been admitted by the OPs Nigam in para No.3 of the written statement.

8.                     The arguments advanced by the counsel for the complainant that OPs Nigam has wrongly and illegally issued bill No. 4944 dated 10.09.2014 amounting to Rs. 49,384/- (copy of bill not placed on file) on the basis of connected load 7.1 KW is not tenable as from the perusal of electricity Bill bearing No. 4628 dated 10.07.2011 (Annexure C-16) for the period from 26.04.2011 to 26.06.2011 ( Annexure C-16), it is duly evident that this electricity bill has been issued by showing connected load as 1 KW not 7.1 KW as alleged in the complaint. Further, we have also perused the other electricity bills placed on file for the year 2013 (Annexure C-9 to C-13), these bills were also issued on the basis of connected load as 1 KW not 7.1 KW, So, the version of the complainant that OPs Nigam issued wrong and false bills showing connected load as 7.1 KW is totally proves falsify. Even, the status of meter has been shown as OK in these bills Annexure C-5 to C-16. Hence, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief on this account.

9.                     However, from the perusal of copy of application and receipt of Rs. 10/- (Annexure C-2) deposited for reducing the load from 7.1 KW to 1 KW, it is duly evident that the complainant had applied to reduce the load on 24.05.2010, whereas OPs Nigam issued the electricity bill bearing No. 4497 dated 10.07.2010 (Annexure C-15) for the period from 26.04.2010 to 26.06.2010 and further the bill bearing No. 4553 dated 08.11.2010 for the period from 09.08.2010 to 26.01.2010 (Annexure C-14) showing the connected load as 7.1 KW instead of reducing load of 1 Kw which is totally wrong and illegal. Learned counsel for the OPs Nigam failed to explain and convince this Forum that how these bills were issued to the complainant showing connected load 7.1 KW after receiving the application and fee on 24.05.2010 from the complainant. Further, the OPs Nigam has also not placed on file any correct copy of ledger of the account of complainant. Although the OPs Nigam later on issued the bills showing the connected load as 1 KW but the connected load was not reduced from the date of application and deposit of amount of Rs. 10/- on this account i.e. on 24.05.2010.Hence, the complainant is entitled to get some relief.

10.                   Resultantly, in the circumstances noted above, we are of the considered view that there is a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Ops Nigam and we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and hereby directed the Ops to overhaul the account of the complainant by treating the connected load as 1KW from 24.05.2010 i.e. from the date of application and deposited the fee of Rs. 10/- vide receipt No. 55/59540 Annexure C-2 till the OPs Nigam issued the bills to the complainant by showing connected load as 1 KW. Order be complied within a period of 30 days after preparation of copy of this order failing which complainant shall be entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum as per law. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court. 21.03.2017.

                                                                                                (ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                                 PRESIDENT

                                                                                                 DCDRF, YAMUNANAGAR.

 

                                                                                                 (S.C.SHARMA )

                                                                                                  MEMBER