Haryana

Sonipat

CC/91/2015

VIKAS S/O MAHA SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

SDO OP CITY DIVISION UHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

K.K. MALIK

12 May 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

               

 

                                Complaint No.91 of 2015

                                Instituted on:17.03.2015

                                Date of order:12.05.2016

 

Vikas son of Maha Singh, resident of Chopra colony, Gohana, Distt. Sonepat.

 

                                                     ...Complainant.

 

                        Versus

 

SDO ‘OP’ City Divn. UHBVN Gohana, Distt. Sonepat.

                                                     ...Respondent.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. KK Malik, Adv. for complainant.

           Sh. IS Malik, Adv. for respondent.

 

BEFORE-    NAGENDER SINGH, PRESIDENT.

          SMT.PRABHA WATI, MEMBER.

          

O R D E R

 

         Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondent alleging therein that he is having an electricity connection no.EGii-1012-X .The respondent is issuing the bill for wrong and illegal amount w.e.f the bill no.02331 dated 9.5.2012 and lastly the respondent has issued the bill dated 27.9.2014 for the period 7.7.2014 to 7.9.2014 showing units consumed 1584 for Rs.9905.82 paise and the respondent wrongly charged Rs.1,19,451/- showing as arrear from the complainant. The complainant also received the bill dated 31.1.2015 for the period 7.11.2014 to 7.1.2015 from the respondent for Rs.1,36,203/-. The complainant has alleged the said demand of the respondent to be wrong and illegal. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        In reply, the respondent has submitted that the complainant has consumed 12090 electricity units from 7.8.2012 to 4/2015 and he had not paid even a single penny to the respondent, whereas at the time of overhauling the account, an amount of Rs.97337/- was adjusted in the account of the complainant and the same was also adjusted for 2^nd time by the computer and in this way, an amount of Rs.1,97,674/- has been adjusted in the account of the complainant whereas he was entitled to Rs.97337/- and now a sum of Rs.1,53,568/- is outstanding against the complainant including Rs.97337/-.    The bill sent to the complainant is legal and justified.  The complainant has not paid even a single penny after

7.8.2012, so he is not entitled for any relief and compensation and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.        We have heard the ld. Counsel for both the parties at length and has gone through the entire relevant material available on the case file carefully & minutely.

4.        Ld. Counsel for the complainant has submitted that the respondent only to harass and humiliate the complainant is issuing wrong and illegal bill to the complainant.  The complainant also received the bill dated 31.1.2015 for the period 7.11.2014 to 7.1.2015 from the respondent for Rs.1,36,203/-.

          On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the respondent has submitted that the complainant has consumed 12090 electricity units from 7.8.2012 to 4/2015 and he had not paid even a single penny to the respondent, whereas at the time of overhauling the account, an amount of Rs.97337/- was adjusted in the account of the complainant and the same was also adjusted for 2^nd time by the computer and in this way, an amount of Rs.1,97,674/- has been adjusted in the account of the complainant whereas he was entitled to Rs.97337/- and now a sum of Rs.1,53,568/- is outstanding against the complainant including Rs.97337/-.    The bill sent to the complainant is legal and justified.  The complainant has not paid even a single penny after 7.8.2012, so he is not entitled for any relief and compensation.

          After hearing both the learned counsel for the parties at length and after going through the entire relevant records available on the case file very carefully, we are of the view that the action taken by the respondent in the matter of the complainant is legal and perfectly justified.  At the time of overhauling the account, an amount of Rs.97337/- was adjusted in the account of the complainant and the same was also adjusted for 2^nd time by the computer and in this way, an amount of Rs.1,97,674/- has been adjusted in the account of the complainant whereas he was entitled to Rs.97337/-.  In our view, the demand of the respondent is legal and justified and the complainant is legally liable to pay the outstanding amount to the respondent.  The complainant has failed to prove any kind of deficiency in service on the part of the respondent and thus, no directions of any kind can be given to the respondent.  Accordingly, we hereby dismiss the present complaint since it has no merit.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to  both the parties free of costs.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

(Prabha Wati)                   (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF                        DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced: 12.05.2016