Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/879/2012

Mahabir Parsad S/o. Sham Lal - Complainant(s)

Versus

SDO UHBVN Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

P.K.Sharma

30 Mar 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

 

                                                                                    Complaint No.879 of 2012.

                                                                                    Date of institution: 14.08.2012

                                                                                    Date of decision: 30.03.2016

Mahabir Parsad aged 60 years son of Sh. Sham Lal, resident of Gandhi Nagar, Yamuna Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.

     …Complainant.

 

                                    Versus

 

1. S.D.O. UHBVN Ltd. Op. Sub Divn. Industrial Area, Yamuna Nagar.
2. Executive Engineer (OP), Division of respondent No.1, Saharanpur Road, Yamuna Nagar. 

 

                                                                                                                ..Respondents.

 

BEFORE:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT,

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: Sh. Sukhdev Singh, Advocate, counsel for complainant.

              Sh. Dharamvir Singh, Advocate, counsel for respondents.   

 

ORDER

 

1.                     Complainant Sh. Mahabir Parshad has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.  

2.                   Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that the complainant is having a domestic electricity connection bearing account No. Y42YA196574-W at his residence and paying all the bills regularly. Now the respondents (hereinafter referred as OPs) issued a bill for a sum of Rs. 69443/- bearing No. 1794 dated 22.7.2012 which is not as per actual consumption. Even in the bill in question the consumption of electricity in the bills in the month of September,2011, November 2011, January 2012, March 2012 and May 2012 has been shown as 150 units per bill whereas the consumption of the electricity in this bill has been shown as 11495 units which is totally beyond imagination and the same requires to be corrected. It has been further stated that electricity connection of the complainant is bearing the load of 2 KW and the complainant never consumed the electricity worth of Rs. 69443/- as the previous bills were sent on average basis from September 2011 to May 2012. It has been further mentioned that complainant was not receiving some bills from the Ops for the last some times and the meter reader of the OPs also not visited the premises of the complainant. The complainant made several requests to the OPs but all in vain. Due to this reason, the consumption charges against the said meter of the complainant have accumulated due to this negligence and careless act of the Ops and consequently false surcharges have been added in the consumption bill of the complainant and the amount increased to such like margine that the complainant is not able to pay. When the complainant requested the OPs but they flatly refused to accede the genuine request of the complainant and lastly prayed that OPs be directed to quash the amount of Rs. 69443/- and further the account of electricity connection of the complainant be overhauled as per actual consumption to which the complainant is ready to pay the same in equal monthly installments and the Ops may kindly be directed to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses. Hence, this complaint.

3.                     Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed its written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as no locus standi, no cause of action, not come to the Forum with clean hands and on merit it has been stated that the true and material facts are that the complainant is user of electricity connection bearing account No.Y42YA196574-W but inadvertently the meter reading was not taken for 43 months as the same falls out of group and due to this reason the bills ware sent to the complainant on average basis. When the said inadvertent mistake came to the knowledge of the OPs, the OPs overhauled the account of the complainant and after overhauling the account of the complainant the total consumed unit of the complainant were found as 20394 units and out of the said consumed units of 20394 the 8899 units were deducted on the basis of amount paid by the complainant and after making adjustment the balance units found as 11495. As such on the basis of the said units i.e. 11495, the amount was calculated on the basis of said units, the bill of an amount of Rs. 69443/- was sent to the complainant. So, the amount has been demanded as per actual consumption and the complainant is bound to make the payment. It has also been mentioned that the complainant did not deposit even a single penny since last 43 months. Hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.                     To prove the case, counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Annexure CX and document such as Photo copy of electricity bill bearing No. 1794 dated 22.7.2012 as Annexure C-1 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

5.                     On the other hand, counsel for the OPs tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. S.K.Sharma, SDO, UHBVNL as Annexure RX and documents such as Photocopy of account statement as Annexure R-1 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.

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

7.                     The only case of the complainant is that OPs were issuing the electricity bills to the complainant on the average basis from the last 2-3 years and now a bill bearing No. 1794 dated 22.7.2012 for a sum of Rs. 69443/- being accumulated amount has been sent to the complainant which is totally illegal and liable to be quashed. Due to this negligence and carelessness act of the Ops and the consequently false surcharge added in the consumption bills of the complainant, the amount increased to such like margin that the complainant is not able to pay.

8.                     On the other hand, counsel for the OPs argued that due to advertently the meter reading was not taken for 43 months as the account of the complainant falls out of group and due to this reason, the bills were sent to the complainant on average basis. When the said inadvertent came to the knowledge of the Ops, the account of the complainant was overhauled and after making adjustment of the unit and amounts charged on the basis of average from the complainant balance amount of Rs. 69443/- on account of balance unit i.e. 20394-8899 units = 11495 units was sent to the complainant. As such, there was no deficiency in service on the part of OPs.

9.                     It is not disputed that complainant was not having a domestic connection bearing account No. Y42YA196574-W at his residence. It is also not disputed that a bill bearing No. 1794 dated 22.7.2012 amounting to Rs. 69443/- was issued to the complainant. From the contents of the complaint, it is clear that electricity bills were issued on average basis of 150 units bimonthly to the complainant for a period of 43 months and the account of the complainant was overhauled and after adjustment of the consumed units amount, an amount of Rs. 69443/- has been raised in the bill bearing No. 1794 dated 22.7.2012 i.e. bill in dispute on the basis of actual consumption. It is not the case of the complainant that the meter in question was defective or the alleged units were not consumed by him. The only grievances of the complainant is that due to negligence and careless act of the Ops and consequently false surcharge, the amount increased to such like margin that the complainant is not able to pay. It is admitted case of the OPs that the OPs could not issued the electricity bills on actual consumptions for 43 months and bills were sent on average basis and further the account of the complainant had already been overhauled after deducting the amount charged of units of average basis and amount in dispute i.e. Rs. 69443/- has been demanded for the unit of actual consumption. Counsel for the complainant failed to convince this Forum that amount of Rs. 69443/- calculated by the OPs is illegal.

10.                   We have perused the account statement Annexure R-1, it is clear that previously the bills were sent on average basis to the complainant. Although the account of the complainant has been overhauled by the OPs and a legal bill has been raised on the basis of actual consumption after adjustment of the units charged on average basis, even then, it is clear that Ops failed to issue the electricity bills regularly on actual basis for near about 43 months due to which the complainant has suffered mental agony, harassment and was burdened with accumulative huge amount at one time.

11.                   Hence, we are of the considered view that the act of the OPs constitute a deficiency in service. Hence, the complainant is entitled for relief.

12.                   Resultantly, we partly allow the complaint of complainant and direct the Ops to charge the disputed amount of Rs. 69443/-( less amount if already deposited)  in equal six bimonthly installments without any surcharge with current bill from the complainant which will be issued after preparation of copy of this order. Further the OPs are also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 8,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs. 2000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant  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 sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance. 

Announced: 30.03.2016.

                                                                                    (ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                    PRESIDENT

 

 

                                                                                    (S.C.SHARMA)

                                                                                    MEMBER