BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.

Complaint no.164/13.

Date of instt.: 12.08.2013. 

                                                 Date of Decision: 17.03.2015.

Shyam Sunder S/o Ram Chander, resident of Village & P.O. Siwan, District Kaithal.

                                                        ……….Complainant.      

                                        Versus

1. Sub Divisional Officer ‘OP’ Division, Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Siwan, Distt. Kaithal.

2. XEN, Sub Divisional Officer, ‘OP’ Division, Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Distt. Kaithal.

3. Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Siwan, Distt. Kaithal through its Secretary, Shakti Bhawan, Panchkula.

..……..Opposite Parties.

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

Before:           Sh. Rajbir Singh, Presiding Member.

     Smt. Harisha Mehta, Member.

Present :        Sh. Balbir Bansal, Advocate for complainant.

Sh. R.S.Dhull, Advocate for the opposite parties.

                       ORDER

(RAJBIR SINGH, PRESIDING MEMBER).

                       The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that he is consumer of Ops vide electricity connection No.KS-12-0750 and has been paying the bills regularly.  The complainant has challenged the bill amounting to Rs.33,128/-.  The said bill is wrong and illegal.  This way, the Ops are deficient in service.  Hence, this complaint is filed.   

2.     Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared before this forum and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus-standi; jurisdiction; that the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum.  The true and material facts are that as meter of the complainant was already declared 88.79% slow as per YMPL report, so on 22.12.2012, the meter was removed from the site packed in Gatta Box and duly signed by checking party and complainant and lateron, a transparent tape was wrapped over the signatures for sending meter to lab for checking the accuracy of meter in lab.  The checking report was prepared at the spot on which the complainant refused to sign.  So, it was declared suspected case of theft of energy.  The meter was also checked in the M & T lab, Kaithal and as per M & T lab report dt. 15.01.2013, two numbers M & T seals were found tampered and lace wire of seals were found cut and re-affixed.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of answering Ops.  On merits, the contents of complaint are denied and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.    

3.     In support of their case, both the parties submitted their affidavits and documents.  

4.     We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and minutely.

5.     We have perused the complaint & reply thereto and also have gone through the evidence led by the parties.

6.     Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we found that the complainant is consumer of Ops vide electricity connection No.KS-12-0750 and has been paying the bills regularly.  The complainant has challenged the bill amounting to Rs.33,128/-.   On perusal of all the documents available on the file, we found that the premises of complainant was checked by the checking party on 22.12.2012.  The copy of checking report (Ex.R2) is placed on the file and on the said checking report, it is reported by checking party that the meter removed from the site packed in Gatta Box yellow colour tape was wrapped on the box.  Checking party and consumer signed on tap.  Lateron, an transparent tape wrapped on signature.  Meter is 88.79% slow as per YMPL report.  Packed meter will be sent to M & T lab, Kaithal for checking the accuracy of meter.  As per lab report dt. 15.01.2013 (Ex.R3), it is mentioned in the column of observation that two numbers M & T seals were found tampered and lace wire of seals were found cut and re-affixed.  During internal checking, the turns of current coil were found reduced to effect the accuracy of meter.  The M & T lab report was prepared at the spot on which Sh. Pawan Kumar s/o complainant, who was present in the lab signed voluntarily and without any objection being raised.  In the letter dt. 22.02.2013 (Ex.R4) written by XEN to S.D.O. UHBVN, Siwan, it is mentioned that After going through the case, it has been observed that “2 nos. M & T seals found tampered, lash wire of seals cut & re-fixed, turns of current coil found reduced to effect the working of meter.  Meter already declared 88.79% slow as per M/s. YMPL report.  So, it is crystal clear that the said case is of theft of energy.  Keeping in view the judgment dated 01.07.2013 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled as UP Power Corporation Ltd. Vs. Anis Ahmad, the present complaint stands dismissed. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach at appropriate Court/Forum if he so desired and in that eventuality, the period of litigation before this Forum shall not be counted towards the period of limitation for approaching appropriate court/forum. Exemption of time spent before this Forum is granted  in terms of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled “Laxmi Engineering Works versus PSG Industrial Institute  (1995) 3 SCC page 583.  A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.  File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced.

Dt.17.03.2015.

                        (Harisha Mehta),                 (Rajbir Singh),   

                             Member.                              Presiding Member.