Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/167/2014

Kehar Singh s/o Sh.Janak Singh, 47 years - Complainant(s)

Versus

SDO (op) UHBVNL, - Opp.Party(s)

SS Saini

30 May 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

 

                                                                                              Complaint No. 167 of 2014.

                                                                                              Date of institution: 26.03.2014

                                                                                              Date of decision: 30.05.2016

 

Kehar Singh aged about 47 years son of Sh. Janak Singh, resident of village Marwa Kalan, Sub Tehsil Bilaspur, District Yamuna Nagar.          

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             …Complainant.

 

                                    Versus

1. The S.D.O. (OP) Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, Sub Division Bilaspur, Tehsil Bilaspur, District Yamuna Nagar.  
2. X.En, UHBVN Ltd. Yamuna Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar.  
3. Managing Director, Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. Sec-6, Shakti Bhawan, Panchkula.  

 

                                                                                                                                                                        ...Respondents.  

 

BEFORE:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT,

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: Sh. Surjeet Singh Saini, Advocate, counsel for complainant. 

              Sh.  Zile Singh, Advocate, counsel for respondents.    

 

ORDER

 

1.                     Complainant Kehar Singh  has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 praying therein that respondents (herein after referred as OPs) be directed to quash the illegal arrear of Rs. 40,086/- from the electricity bill of the complainant and further to pay compensation and litigation expenses.  

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that complainant is having an electricity connection bearing account No. Y35JB133601H at his residence and he was depositing the electricity bills regularly. The Ops sent a bill in the month of February, 2014 amounting to Rs. 42,592/- dated 10.02.2014 in which an amount of Rs. 40,086/- has been shown as arrear which is illegal and after receiving the abovesaid bill, the complainant visited the office of Op No.1 and requested to correct the same but the OP No.1 postponed the matter on one pretext or the other. The complainant again approached the OP No.1 and requested to correct  the illegal arrear in electricity bill but Op No.1 did not listen the genuine request of complainant and totally refused to accede the genuine request of the complainant and threatened to disconnect the electricity connection, which is quite illegal, wrong and against the natural justice. Hence, this complaint.  

3.                     Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed its written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as complaint is not maintainable, complainant has got no locus standi or cause of action to file and maintain the present complaint, the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum and on merit it has been stated that the complainant is defaulter of Rs. 42,592/- against the connection No. Y35JB13601H and the connection of the complainant is liable to be disconnected due to non payment of the abovesaid arrears. The alleged bill has been issued as per actual consumption of electricity. It has been further submitted that the complainant has deposited only Rs. 5500/- on 20.12.2011 for the period from 12/2011 till today, except this nothing has been paid from 08/2010 to till today despite issuance of consumption bills. The copy of ledger is Annexure R-1.   Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint as there was no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of OPs.

4.                     To prove the case, counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Annexure CW/A and document such as Photo copy of electricity bill dated 10.02.2014 as Annexure C-1 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

5.                     On the other hand, counsel for the OPs also tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Pardeep Panwar, SDO (OP), Sub Divn. Bilaspur as Annexure RW/A and document such as copy of account statement  as Annexure R-1 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.

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

7.                     The only grievances of the complainant is that in the month of February 2014 the OPs have sent an illegal and false bill of Rs. 42,592/- dated 10.02.2014 in which the OPs have shown arrear of Rs. 40,086/- whereas the complainant has not used so much units and this bill has been falsely issued.

8.                     On the other hand, counsel for the OPs hotly argued at length that electricity bill was issued to the complainant on actual consumption basis and referred the account statement Annexure R-1.

9.                     We have perused the account statement (Annexure R-1) carefully and minutely from which it is evident that the complainant is a defaulter since August 2010 and he only made a payment of Rs. 5500/- to the Ops in the month of December 2011 and thereafter he did not make any payment on account of electricity consumption. The amount of Rs. 40,086/- shown in the electricity bill dated 10.02.2014 (Annexure C-1) is a bill of actual consumption alongwith surcharge for the period from August, 2010 to February, 2014. Thus, the complainant is liable to pay the defaulting amount to the Ops for the consumption of electricity and the point raised by the complainant in his complaint regarding arrear has no force in the eye of law being default of OPs.    In the absence of any cogent evidence, it cannot be presumed that the impugned bill has been wrongly issued to the complainant.

10                    In the above noted facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs as the bills have been issued to the complainant on actual consumption charges. Even in the bill Annexure C-1 the status of the meter has been shown as O.K.

11                    Resultantly, we find no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to 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.

Dated: 30.05.2016.

 

                                                                                                (ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                                PRESIDENT

 

 

 

                                                                                                 (S.C.SHARMA)

                                                                                                  MEMBER