Haryana

Ambala

CC/12/2019

Mam Chand - Complainant(s)

Versus

SDO UHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

03 Jan 2020

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

 

                                                                      Complaint case no.         :   12 of 2019

                                                                     Date of Institution           :   14.01.2019

                                                                      Date of decision     :   03.01.2020.

 

Mam Chand son of Shri Shyam Singh, aged about 52 years, resident of Village and Post Office Kurali, Tehsil Naraingarh, District Ambala-Haryana.

          ……. Complainant.

 

S.D.O. Sub Division, Y-11, U.H.B.V.N. Ltd., Naraingarh, Distt. Ambala-Haryana.

                                                               ….…. Opposite Party.

         

Before:        Ms. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Ms. Ruby Sharma, Member,

Sh. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.          

                            

Present:       Ms. Anupma Sharma, Advocate, counsel for complainant.

Shri Vivek Sachdeva, Advocate, counsel for OPs.

 

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President

Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’), praying for issuance of following directions to it:-

1. To install/reconnect the electricity connection/meter to avoid future complications to the complainant.
2. To amend/correct the electricity consumption bills upto March-April 2018.
3. Not to involve the complainant in any type of false case pertaining to the present subject matter.
4. To pay litigation charges.
5.  

Any other relief whichthis Hon’ble Forum may deemfit.

 

Brief facts of the case are that the complainant is a labourer and is a permanent resident of Village and Post Office Kurali, Tehsil Naraingarh, District Ambala. He is having domestic electric connection bearing Account No.Y11MP121662N. There is no big electricity/electronic item installed in his house and he is only using essential electricity/electronic items in his house. The average electricity bill of the complainant was upto Rs.1,000/- per month. However, the OP issued a bill No.2668 for Rs.19,696/- including arrears from 27.03.2018 to 13.04.2018. Thereafter, OP issued the following electricity bills:-

Bill No.       Date                                        Amount

2718           29.05.2018 to 15.06.2018                 Rs.20,566/-

2747           28.07.2018 to 14.08.2018                 Rs.31,557/-

2750           29.09.2018 to 16.10.2018                 Rs.79,105/-

2788           27.11.2018 to 14.12.2018                 Rs.1,33,042/-

He visited the office of OP many times and complained about getting electricity bills of excessive amount and also requested the OP for checking of the electricity meter to find out the reason of excessive consumption of electricity, but nothing was done by it. In the first week of January 2019, the meter of the complainant was burnt and he reported the matter to the OP, but it instead of doing the needful had disconnected the electricity connection. The said act of the OP amounts to deficiency in service. Hence, the present complaint. 

2.                Upon notice, OP appeared through counsel and filed written version by raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability; cause of action and not coming to this Forum with clean hands and suppressed the true and material facts. On merits it is stated that the complainant is a consumer of the OP and having consumer Account No.Y11MP12166N. Complainant had been supplying electricity to three other houses through his meter; as clearly disclosed by meter Reader, ALM and Area Incharge, to the OP. Moreover, he had not paid the electricity bills after 15.12.2016. The average electricity bill of the complainant was not upto Rs.1,000/-. He had paid the last bill on 15.12.2016 and therefore the bill in question was issued including arrears. Moreover, the complainant was supplying electricity to three other houses through his meter illegally. The bills were issued on the basis of actual electricity consumed by the complainant. Due to non payment of bills, his electricity connection was disconnected. There is no deficiency on the part of the OP and the complaint filed against it may be dismissed with costs.

3.                Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavits of complainant as Annexure CA & CB along with documents as Annexure C-1 to C-5 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for OP tendered affidavit of Shri Gurbaaz Singh-SDO Operation Sub Division, Y-11, UHBVNL, Naraingarh District Ambala as Annexure OP-A alongwith documents Annexure OP-1 to OP-4 and closed the evidence on behalf of the OP.

4.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the case file.

5.                Leaned counsel for the complainant argued that before May, 2018, complainant used to get the electricity bills of approximately Rs.1,000/- per month but after that the OP started sending him the bills of huge amount. He approached the OP, for checking the meter but no action was taken by it. In the first week of January 2019, meter got burnt and he reported the matter to the OP but it instead of doing the needful had disconnected the electricity connection.

6.                The learned counsel for the OP vehemently argued that the bills were rightly issued by the OP, on the basis of the actual consumption of the electricity by the complainant. On checking, it was found that complainant was illegally supplying electricity through his electric connection to three more houses. The complainant lastly paid the electricity consumption charges on 15.12.2016.  Due to non-payment of the electricity charges, the electricity connection of the complainant was disconnected. Complainant neither approached for change of meter, nor informed about the burning of the meter to the OP. No cause of action has arisen to the complainant to file the present complaint against the OP thus the present complaint may be dismissed with heavy costs.

7.                Complainant has pleaded that he requested the OP to check the meter, however, no such document has been placed on record by him in this regard. Whereas, in order to prove this fact that complainant was supplying electricity through his electric connection to three more houses, the OP has placed on record the report of the meter reader and the lineman, Annexure OP-1 and OP-2, the said reports are duly signed by the SDO “OP S/Division Naraingarh. These reports have not been controverted by the complainant. From the said reports, it is clear that complainant was indulged in un-authorized usage of electricity. In the case of U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Anis Ahmad (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in para No.46 of the judgement has held that:

46. The act of indulgence in “unauthorized use of electricity” by a person, as defined in clause (b) of the Explanation below Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 neither has any relationship with “unfair trade practice” or “restrictive trade practice” or “deficiency in service” nor does it amounts to hazardous services by the license. Such acts of “unauthorized use of electricity” has nothing to do with charging price in excess of the price. Therefore, acts of person in indulging in “unauthorized use of electricity” do not fall within the meaning of “complaint”, as we have noticed above and, therefore, the “complaint” against assessment under Section 126 is not maintainable before the Consumer Forum. The Commission has already noticed that the offences referred to in Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003. In that view of the matter also the complaint against any action taken under Section 135 to 140 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is not maintainable before the Consumer Forum.

8.                In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case referred to above, we hereby dismiss the present complaint being not maintainable. The parties are left to bear their own costs. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach appropriate court or Authority for redressal of his grievance and seek condonation of delay, if any for the period for which the instant complaint remained pending before this Forum. Certified copies of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced on :03.01.2020

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)            (Ruby Sharma)               (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                                  Member                       President