Punjab

Faridkot

CC/18/56

Angrej Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

SDO PSPCL - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

13 May 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

                                                    Complaint No :          56 of 2018

Date of Institution :    26.03.2018

Date of Decision :      13.05.2019

Angrej Singh son of Mohinder Singh r/o New Cantt Road, Street No. 4 ½ , Faridkot Tehsil and District Faridkot.

                                                             ...Complainant

Versus

1. S.D.O. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., City Sub Division, Faridkot.                                    
2. Beant Singh J.E. City Sub Division, at present posted as SDO, Sub Urban, Faridkot.                                   

   .........Ops

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

                                

Quorum: Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President,

               Smt. Param Pal Kaur, Member.

 

Present: Complainant in person,

    Sh M S Brar, Ld Counsel for OPs.

 

ORDER

(Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                           Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd etc/Ops seeking directions to Ops to withdraw the amount of rs.20,334/- raised by Ops in bills, to adjust the

cc  no.56 of  2018

amount of Rs.2000/-received from complainant and for further directing them to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by complainant besides litigation expenses to complainant.

2                                           Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he is having domestic electric connection bearing a/c no. F-31 KG-570212 (old), 3000437147 (new) running in his name. It is submitted that earlier his meter was moving very fast and he reported the matter to OP-1, who assigned OP-2 to check his meter. OP-2 visited the house of complainant and after checking said that meter of complainant is required to be sent to M E Lab for checking purpose and meter checking fees is Rs.2000/-. Complainant paid Rs.2,000/-to OP-2, who gave receipt for receiving Rs.2000/-from complainant and also removed the old meter of complainant and installed new one on its place. after that complainant received bill in which Rs.16,000/-were charged more alongwith current consumption charges. On receiving the same, complainant approached OP-1,   where he was told to deposit current bill and they assured to adjust the amount deposited by him on receipt of ME Lab Report. But since then, they have been illegally and unlawfully adding excessive amount in his bills without any reason. On receiving the present month bill, when complainant again approached OP-1 and requested them to correct the bill, he came to know his meter has not been sent to M E Lab. on this, he told them to adjust the amount of Rs.2000/-deposited by him with OP-2, but they refused to do so and

cc  no.56 of  2018

threatened to disconnect his electric connection, if he fails to pay the entire amount in time, which amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of OPs and this act and conduct of Ops has caused great inconvenience, harassment and mental tension to complainant for which he has prayed for seeking directions to Ops to withdraw the demand of sundry charges and prayed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him besides litigation expenses. Hence, this complaint.

3                                       Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dt 28.03.2018, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.

4                                           On receipt of the notice, the opposite parties filed written statement taking preliminary objection that present complaint is not filed against PSPCL, rather it is filed against the employees of Ops and therefore, it is not maintainable in present form. However, on merits, ld counsel for OPs have denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being incorrect and wrong and asserted that complainant is not the consumer of OPs. It is averred that bill for the period from 19.02.2012 to 9.02.2013 was issued for 673 units for Rs.3,997/-from which complainant paid Rs.3000/-and Rs.997/-were due. Bill for 19.02.2013 to 21.04.2013 for 344 units upto reading of 15727 for Rs.2156 was issued alongwith unpaid amount of Rs.997/-. Old meter was changed vide MCO dated 29.05.2013 with reading of zero units and

cc  no.56 of  2018

old meter was removed with reading of 16046 units. Consumption of new meter was 1029 units from 29.05.2013 to 21.08.2013. Old meter reading was for 319 units and it was required to be issued for 1348 units, but inadvertently, it was issued for 1848 units and then, refund of 500 units was given through Sundry Charges and Allowance Register. Bill for 21.08.2013 to 23.10.2013 was prepared for 800 units for Rs.5350/- and total amount comes to Rs.13,927/-. It is further averred that bill for the period from 23.10.2013 to 23.12.2013 was issued for 314 units for Rs.1920/-on average basis. Meter of complainant was changed vide MCO dated 10.01.2014 and old meter with reading of 2464 units was removed and new meter was installed.  From 20.02.2014 to 20.04.2014, bill was prepared for Rs.17,191/- for 147 units showing old reading of 160 units and new reading 307 units. Bill from 20.04.2014 to 15.06.2014 was for Rs.2500/-for 392 units showing old reading 307 units and new reading 699 units. Bill for the period from 15.06.2014 to 21.08.2014 was prepared for 699 units of old reading and new reading of 1156 units and in this way total bill for Rs.19,530/-was issued on 21.08.2014. Detail of amount charged was clearly explained to complainant and therefore, there was no need for sending the meter of complainant in M E Lab for checking. Amount charged is correctly assessed and complainant is liable to pay the same. There is no irregularity in bills issued to complainant and they have every right to recover the same. It is further averred that no amount has been charged illegally and amount raised vide bill in question is still due and recoverable from him. It is reiterated

cc  no.56 of  2018

that there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering OPs. All the other allegations and allegation with regard to relief sought too were refuted with a prayer that complaint deserves to be dismissed with costs.

5                                     Parties were given proper opportunities        to produce evidence to prove their respective case. Counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavits of complainant Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to 6 and closed the same.

6                                 In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, the opposite parties tendered in evidence affidavit of Gaurav Kakkar Ex OP-1 and documents Ex OP-2 to OP-19 and closed the evidence.

7                               The ld Counsel for complainant argued that earlier  meter of complainant was moving very fast and on reporting the matter to OPs, they removed the old meter and installed new one and told complainant that his meter is required to be sent to M E Lab for checking purpose and took meter checking fees of Rs.2000/- from him. After that complainant received bill in which Rs.16,000/-were charged more alongwith current consumption charges. Complainant approached OP-1, where he was told to deposit current bill and they assured to adjust the amount deposited by him on receipt of ME Lab Report. But since then, they have been illegally and unlawfully adding excessive amount in his bills without any reason. He came to know that his meter has not been sent to M E Lab and when, he told them to adjust the amount of Rs.2000/-deposited by him with OP-2, but they refused to do so and

cc  no.56 of  2018

threatened to disconnect his electric connection, if he fails to pay the charged amount in time. Complainant made several requests to them to withdraw the said bill, but all in vain. All these acts of OPs amount to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on their part and due to these acts of OPs, complainant has faced great mental tension, agony and harassment. He has prayed that OPs may be directed to correct the demand raised in bill in question and also prayed for compensation and litigation expenses.

8                              To controvert the arguments of complainant, ld counsel for OPs argued that meter of complainant was working perfectly and all amount is charged correctly as per consumption of power reading shown on meter and it has been correctly assessed and there was no need to send the meter of complainant for checking in M E Lab. It is further argued that bill for the period from 19.02.2012 to 9.02.2013 was issued for Rs.3,997/-from which complainant paid Rs.3000/-and Rs.997/-were due. Bill for 19.02.2013 to 21.04.2013 for 344 units upto reading of 15727 for Rs.2156 was issued alongwith unpaid amount of Rs.997/-. Old meter was changed vide MCO dated 29.05.2013 with reading of zero units and old meter was removed with reading of 16046 units. Consumption of new meter was 1029 units from 29.05.2013 to 21.08.2013. Old meter reading was for 319 units and it was required to be issued for 1348 units, but inadvertently, it was issued for 1848 units and then, refund of 500 units was given through Sundry Charges and Allowance Register. Bill for 21.08.2013 to 23.10.2013 was prepared for

cc  no.56 of  2018

800 units for Rs.5350/- and total amount comes to Rs.13,927/-. It is further averred that bill for the period from 23.10.2013 to 23.12.2013 was issued for 314 units for Rs.1920/-on average basis. Meter of complainant was changed vide MCO dated 10.01.2014 and old meter with reading of 2464 units was removed and new meter was installed.  From 20.02.2014 to 20.04.2014, bill was prepared for Rs.17,191/- for 147 units showing old reading of 160 units and new reading 307 units. Bill from 20.04.2014 to 15.06.2014 was for Rs.2500/-for 392 units showing old reading 307 units and new reading 699 units. Bill for the period from 15.06.2014 to 21.08.2014 was prepared for 699 units of old reading and new reading of 1156 units and in this way total bill for Rs.19,530/-was issued on 21.08.2014. Detail of amount charged was clearly explained to complainant and therefore, there was no need for sending the meter of complainant in M E Lab for checking. Amount charged is correctly assessed and complainant is liable to pay the same. There is no irregularity in bills issued to complainant and they have every right to recover the same. It is further averred that no amount has been charged illegally and amount raised vide bill in question is still due and recoverable from him. It is reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering OPs. All the other allegations and allegation with regard to relief sought too were refuted with a prayer that complaint deserves to be dismissed with costs. Demand raised by OPs is legal and they have every right to recover it from complainant. The

 

cc  no.56 of  2018

complainant has filed this false and frivolous complainant against the OPs. Prayer for dismissal of complaint is made.

9                                   We have heard the ld counsel for complainant as well OPs and have carefully perused the record available on file.

10                          The case of the complainant is that OPs have been issuing him bill with excessive consumption charges. As per complainant, his meter was running very fast and on his request, OPs changed his old meter and installed a new one. OPs took Rs.2000/-from complainant as meter checking fees for sending the meter in M E Lab for checking, but there after they kept sending his bills containing excessive amount on account of consumption, which is quite illegal. Grievance of complainant is that despite repeated requests, OPs have not corrected his bills and also did not adjust the amount of Rs.2000/-paid by him as meter checking fees. Main contention of complainant is that though no amount on account of consumption charges is due towards him and OPs have not sent his meter to M E Lab for checking and have unnecessarily took Rs.2000/-as meter charging fees from him, but despite repeated requests OPs did not redress his grievance. On the other hand plea taken by OPs is that on request of complainant they changed his old meter and installed new one with zero reading. It was found that meter of complainant was working properly and was recording correct reading. There was no defect in old meter and amount has been charged as per rules and regulations and there is no irregularity in amount charged to

cc  no.56 of  2018

complainant. It is observed that complainant has not challenged any specific bill as no bill date of impugned bill is mentioned over it. Bills Ex OP-2 to Ex OP-10 clearly depict the old reading and new reading and amount of arrears due towards complainant on account of old reading and new reading. Documents Ex OP-11 to OP-19 are copies of detail amount charged to complainant on account of consumption and these documents clearly prove the version of OPs. There seems to be no irregularity in these bills. Complainant is liable to pay the amount charged.

10                            In the light of above discussion and arguments advanced by parties, it is made out that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs in charging the amount on account of consumption of units as per reading. OPs have given clear detail of amount charged for the period from 19.02.2012 to 21.08.2014 and there is no illegality in amount charged. Complainant is liable to pay the amount for the power consumed and OPs are entitled to recover the same. Complainant has failed to prove his case and therefore, complaint in hand is hereby dismissed. However, in peculiar circumstances of the case, there are no orders as to costs. Copy of order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 13.05.2019

 

(Parampal Kaur)                          (Ajit Aggarwal)

 Member                            President