Punjab

Sangrur

CC/6/2017

Neelam Walia - Complainant(s)

Versus

SDO Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Rajinder Goyal

21 Apr 2017

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                             

                                                                   Complaint no. 06                                                                                          

                                                                    Instituted on:  03.01.2017

                                                                   Decided on:    21.04.2017

 

Neelam Walia w/o Balbir Singh  resident of Street No.2, Kishanpura Basti, Jujhar Nagar Sangrur.

                                                …. Complainant.      

                                         

Versus

1.       SDO, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Sub Division Badrukhan, District Sangrur.

2.       Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, The Mall, Patiala through its CMD.

        ….Opposite parties.

 

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:        Shri Rajinder Goyal, Advocate                          

 

FOR THE OPP. PARTIES  :                Shri Mohit Verma, Advocate         

 

 

Quorum

         

                    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

Sarita Garg, Member

Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member

 

ORDER:  

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Neelam Walia complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that she is having a domestic electric connection bearing account  number UP-43/1311-K at her house which remains locked most of the times as she is living in her other house.  The complainant received the bill dated 15.10.2015 ( old reading 259 -new reading 347)  for Rs.3420/- including Rs.1660/- as arrears of previous year and Rs.1260/- as arrears for current financial year. On her request the OP no.1 directed her to deposit Rs.2000/- as part payment which was deposited. Thereafter the complainant did not receive any bill but the OPs disconnected her connection in the month of April 2016 without serving any notice. Thereafter the complainant was told that at the time of removing the meter, final reading  was recorded as 76854 units and previous reading was 259 units. The complainant told the OP that in the bill dated 15.10.2015 new reading was recorded as 347 units and it is not possible that from the month of October 2015  till April 2016, a total of 76595 units are consumed. The complainant requested the OPs that such an excessive consumption might have been resulted due to jumping of meter.  Thereafter the complainant requested to restore the connection but OP no.1 flatly refused to do so.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:- 

i)      OPs be directed to immediately restore the electric connection of complainant by getting outstanding amount deposited from her after withdrawing the illegal demand of Rs.76595 units.

ii)     OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.50000/- as compensation   on account of mental agony, harassment,

iii)     OPs be directed to pay Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses.

2.             In reply filed by the OP no.1, it is submitted that generally the house of the complainant was remained locked and due to that reason the complainant did not deposit the regular bill  but the bill issued to the complainant for the amount of Rs.3420/- under N code and the complainant deposited  only Rs.2000/- as part payment. The actual facts are that the complainant's meter shown the last consumption units is 76854 and the complainant deposited the last bill amount upto 259 units and as per the remaining consumption units is 76595 units and as per the meter shown the consumption data, the OPs have issued the billed amount  in question but it may be meter was jumped due to any kind of complainant involvement  but the complainant meter was removed from the spot due to non deposit of the billed amount. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs. 

3.             The complainant has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-2 and closed evidence. On the other hand, Ops have tendered documents Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-6 and closed evidence.

4.             It is an admitted case of the parties that the complainant is having electric connection in question  which is installed  in her  house. The main grievance of the complainant is that the OPs have illegally and wrongly raised a demand for 76595 units in the electricity bills. It is also admitted by the OPs that house of the complainant generally remains closed and due to that reasons the complainant did not deposit regular bill issued by the OPs from time to time but the bill issued to the complainant  for the amount of Rs.3420/- under N code and  the complainant deposited  Rs.2000/- as part payment.

5.             On the other hand, the complainant's case is that her house where the electric connection was installed  remains locked most of times so she could not receive the bills and could not deposit  the same. However, she received a bill dated 15.10.2015  with old reading 259 units and new reading 347 units for Rs.3420/-including Rs.1660/- as arrears of previous year and Rs.1260/-as arrears of current financial year and she being a poor lady requested the OPs and deposited Rs.2000/- as part payment  under the endorsement of OPs on the bill.

6.             The OPs has produced on record copy of PDCO  Ex.OP-2 . Surprisingly, from the perusal of the said PDCO Ex.OP-2 we find that it is not signed by any officer/ official of the OPs. So, we feel that it is not valid PCDO/ document in the eyes of law. The OPs have also produced on record copy of consumption detail of electricity units consumed by the complainant Ex.OP-3 which shows that from 26.06.2013 to 21.05.2015  the complainant consumed   below 25 electricity units and  in the bill dated 22.07.2015 she consumed 208 units and further in bill dated 6.10.2015 she consumed 88 units.  In the last entry of bill dated 5.4.2016 which is for consumption of 76595 units  the old reading is shown  as 259 units whereas  in the bill dated 6.10.2015 new reading is shown as 347 units and old reading is 259 units.  In the said detail bill for the period between 6.10.2015  and 5.4.2016 is missing. From the perusal of consumption detail Ex.OP-3 we failed to understand that in the bill dated 5.4.2016 how the OPs recorded old reading as 259 units whereas in the bill dated 6.10.2015 the new reading was 347 units.  Moreover,  we have thoroughly gone through the consumption details Ex.OP-4  and find that since 26.06.2013 to 6.10.2015 the consumption of  electricity units of complainant  is from  7 units to 88 units and it is not possible  that from 6.10.2015 to 5.4.2016 the complainant consumed  such a huge units of electricity i.e. 76595 units. Moreover, the meter was not checked in the presence of the complainant  nor the meter was changed under the sign of the complainant. Hence, we feel that the Ops have wrongly issued an electricity bill by raising a demand of 76595 units and due to non-payment of said electricity bill wrongly and illegally disconnected  the electricity connection of the complainant.     

5.             For the reasons recorded above, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OPs to withdraw the electricity bill raising a demand of 76595 units.  The OPs are further directed to restore the electricity connection of the complainant immediately. We further order the OPs to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.5000/- on account of deficiency in service, mental pain, agony harassment and  litigation expenses.

6.             This order of ours shall be complied with  within 60 days from the receipt of copy of the order.  Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.                   Announced

                April 21, 2017

 

 

 

( Vinod Kumar Gulati )  ( Sarita Garg)       (Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                                                  Member                    Member                            President

 

 

BBS/-