Haryana

Yamunanagar

cc/841/2011

Vinod Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

S.D.O,City Sub Division, U.H.B.V.N,Jagadhri. - Opp.Party(s)

P.N.Ahuja

05 Dec 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

 

                                                                                          Complaint No. 841 of 2011.

                                                                                          Date of institution: 08.08.2011        

                                                                                          Date of decision: 05.12.2016

 

Vinod Kumar Gupta aged about 59 years, son of Shri Raghunath Dass R/o C-2/49, Old Chhachhrauli road, Jagadhri, Tehsil Jagadhri, District  Yamuna Nagar.

 

…Complainant.

                                    Versus

1. SDO City Sub Division, U.H.B.V.N. Jagadhri.
2. XEN Enforcement UHBVN Jagadhri.
3. Chairman UHBVN, Ltd. Shakti Bhawan, Panchkula.

 

                                                                                                    ...Respondents

 

BEFORE:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG…………….. PRESIDENT.

                         SH. S.C.SHARMA………………………….MEMBER.

 

Present:           Sh.P.N. Ahuja, Advocate for complainant.

                         Sh. D.S. Kamboj, Advocate for respondents.

 

ORDER

 

1                      The present complaint has been filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that complainant and Shri Durga Dass, (now deceased) were real brothers, and Shri Durga Dass expired on 12.01.2009. The domestic electricity connection bearing account No.Y-31JC-200140A was standing in the name of deceased Durga Dass and the complainant was paying electricity Bill regularly. Lastly the complainant paid bill bearing No.1446 for the month of May, 2011 which was for a sum of Rs.10489.92/-. After the death of Shri Durga Dass, complainant applied for change of name of the above said account and for extension of load on dated 11.07.2011 and a sum of Rs.9975/- was deposited by the complainant as required fee for the said purpose vide receipt No.334 dated 11.07.2011. On 26.06.2011, the complainant received memo No.1151 dated 22.06.2011 from the OPs Nigam in which an amount of Rs.36480/- was added by the OPs Nigam. On inquiry, it was also informed that account of the complainant was overhauled by the Audit party for the period 2006. Hence, the amount of Rs.36470/- has been added. Upon this, complainant wrote a letter dated 29.06.2011to the OP Nigam and asked that on which basis the amount Rs.36470/- has been pointed out and also requested to the OP Nigam to gave the details of the consumption of the said account from January, 2005 to December, 2007. However, OPs Nigam did not bother to reply the same rather issued a Bill No.1491 for the month of July, 2011 in which a sum of Rs.36470/- has been included as arrear. The OPs Nigam has wrongly and illegally issued a memo No.1151 dated 22.06.2011, subsequently bill No.1491 dated 24.07.2011 for the month of July, 2011 which is liable to be quashed. The complainant made so many request but all in vain. Hence, this complaint praying therein that the disputed amount of Rs.36470/- may kindly be quashed and further the OPs be directed to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses.

3.                     Upon notice, OPs Nigam appeared and filed its written statement jointly taking some preliminary objections such as complaint is not maintainable; there is no deficiency in service; complainant has concealed the true and material facts, the true facts are that meter of the complainant became defective since long time back and so the bill of the electricity were being issued to the complainant on average basis. Thereafter, the meter of the complainant was changed and replaced vide MCONo.35/84286 dated 19^th July, 2006 effected on 01.08.2006. On replacement of the old meter, the new meter gave reading as per consumption of the units by the complainant which were on higher side  then the bills issued on average basis as such the account of the complainant bearing No.Y-31JC-200140A was overhaulted by the OPs Nigam and after adjusting the bills paid by the complainant on average basis, remaining amount Rs.36470/- was found due against the complainant which was demanded form him vide the memo in question and subsequently vide electricity bill and on merit all the facts mentioned in the complaint were denied being wrong and concocted and the stands taken in the preliminary objections were reiterated.

4.                     In support of his case, counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of the complainant as CW/A, death certificate of Shri Durga Dass as Annexure C1, electricity bill bearing No.1446 dated 23.05.2011 as Annexure C2, receipt of amount depositing for extension of load as Annexure C3, memo bearing No.1151 dated 22.06.2011 as Annexure C4, application dated 29.06.2011 as Annexure C5, electricity bill bearing No.1491 dated 24^th July, 2011 as Annexure C6 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

5.                     On the other hand, ld. counsel for the OPs tendered into evidence affidavit of Shri R.L. Kamboj, SDO (OP), UHBVN City as Annexure RA, audit report/half margin dated 14.06.2011 as Annexure R1 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.

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

7.                     After hearing both the parties, we are of the considered view that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. From the perusal of audit report on the basis of half margin dated 14.06.2011, it is duly evident that meter of the complainant was replaced vide MCO No.35/84286 dated 19^th July, 2006 on 01.08.2006 and the account of the complainant was overhault on 14.06.2011 for the period of July, 2006 and September, 2006 i.e. after a period of more than 5 years which is totally illegal and against the principles of natural justice. Moreover, the OPs Nigam has not placed on file any affidavit of any Auditor in support of Audit Report (Annexure R1). Further, OP Nigam has also not placed on file the account statement for the period of 2006 and 2007 for which period the account of the complainant was overhauled by the audit party and to prove that the bills were issued on average basis and in the absence of the cogent evidence, it cannot be presumed that the OPs Nigam were issuing the bills on average basis to the complainant.

8.                     On the other angle also, the OPs Nigam cannot charge the amount after a period of two years as per Section 56(2) of the electricity Act, wherein it has been mentioned that:

“Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, no sum due from any consumer, under this section shall be recoverable after the period of two years from the date when such sum became first due unless such sum has been shown continuously as recoverable as arrear of charges for electricity supplied and the licensee shall not cut off the supply of the electricity.”

9.                     Resultantly, in the circumstances noted above, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OPs not to charge the alleged amount of Rs.36,470/- from the complainant along with surcharge, (if any) and overhaul the account of the complainant and issue fresh bill, out of this amount if any amount has been charged by the OPs the same be adjusted in the future bill of the complainant.  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. Copies of this order be supplied to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Pronounced in open court: 05.12.2016.

                                                                                          (ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                           PRESIDENT

                                                                                          DCDRF Yamuna Nagar

 

 

                                                                                          (S.C.SHARMA)

                                                                                           MEMBER