BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.

Complaint no.278/13.

Date of instt.: 18.12.2013. 

                                                 Date of Decision: 23.07.2015.

Sunder Singh S/o Birbal aged about 42 years R/o Village Kakyor Majra, Tehsil Guhla, Distt. Kaithal.

                                                        ……….Complainant.      

                                        Versus

1. S.D.O. OP Sub Division UHBVN Siwan.

2. Executive Engineer Op. Division, UHBVN Guhla.

3. Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., Sector-6, Shakti Bhawan, through its Secretary Panchkula.

..……..Opposite Parties.

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

Before:           Sh. Jagmal Singh, President.

                        Sh. Rajbir Singh, Member.

     Smt. Harisha Mehta, Member.

Present :        Sh. R.K.Sharma, Advocate for complainant.

Sh. Manoj Ichhpilani, Advocate for the opposite parties.

                       ORDER

(JAGMAL SINGH, PRESIDENT).

                       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.K2-0833A and has been paying the bills regularly.  It is alleged that the above-said connection was in the name of complainant’s father and this connection has come to the share of complainant through family settlement.  It is further alleged that one another connection bearing No.K2-0832 was in the name of Billu Ram, brother of complainant.  It is further alleged that now the Op No.1 is sending the pending amount of the bill bearing connection No.K2-832 in the bill/connection No.K2-0833A without any reason.  It is further alleged that now the Op No.1 has sent the bill for sum of Rs.54,951/- in connection No.K2-833/A, which is illegal, arbitrary and excessive.  It is further alleged that the complainant requested the Ops to correct the bill of complainant but they refused to do so.  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; that the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum.  The true facts are that there were two electricity connections, one connection bearing No.K02/0832 was taken for running flour mills in the name of Billu Ram, brother of complainant and second connection bearing No.K02/0833 was taken in the name of Birbal Ram-father of complainant for running tubewell for irrigation of joint land.  The aforesaid Billu Ram failed to pay the electricity bills of the aforesaid connection bearing No.K02/0832.  Hence, the aforesaid connection was disconnected due to non-payment.  An amount of Rs.35,105/- as upto the month of November, 2011 was outstanding towards the said connection.  Many oral requests were made to Billu Ram to pay the aforesaid amount, but he failed to pay the same.  The aforesaid Billu Ram was also found user of the aforesaid connection bearing No.K02-833 for irrigation his joint land with the complainant.  Hence, the aforesaid defaulting amount was rightly transferred in the account of aforesaid account vide sundry bearing No.243 dt. 03.11.2011.  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 his case, the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to C8 and closed evidence on 31.03.2015.  On the other hand, the Ops tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.RW1/A and documents Ex.R1 & R2 and closed evidence on 31.03.2015.  

4.     We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and minutely and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

5.     Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we found that the complainant is consumer of Ops vide electricity connection No.K2-0833A.  Ld. Counsel for the complainant contends that the said connection was in the name of father of complainant and this connection has come to the share of complainant through family settlement.  Ld. Counsel for the complainant further contends that one another connection No.K2-0832 was in the name of Billu Ram, brother of complainant and this connection was disconnected and now the Op No.1 is sending the pending amount of the bill of connection No.K2-832 in the connection No.K2-833A.  On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the Ops contends that there were two electricity connections, one connection bearing No.K02/0832 was taken for running flour mills in the name of Billu Ram, brother of complainant and second connection bearing No.K02/0833 was taken in the name of Birbal Ram-father of complainant for running tubewell for irrigation of joint land.  The aforesaid Billu Ram failed to pay the electricity bills of the aforesaid connection bearing No.K02/0832.  Hence, the aforesaid connection was disconnected due to non-payment.  An amount of Rs.35,105/- as upto the month of November, 2011 was outstanding towards the said connection and the aforesaid defaulting amount was rightly transferred in the account No.K2-833 vide sundry bearing No.243 dt. 03.11.2011.  As per instructions No.7.3 of sales manual 2013, whereby in para No.4 it has been mentioned as under

        4.     The Sub Divisional Officer, should go on pressing (say by issuing weekly reminders to be delivered through peons or if necessary, to be sent by registered post and by personal demands through bonafide representatives of the Nigam) the defaulting consumer for payment of the outstanding dues of the Nigam.  If after the expiry of one month, the consumer continues to default, the sum of the security deposit should be re-appropriated towards the amount of arrears.  The balance dues, if any, should be transferred to any other connection, which may be held in the name of the same consumer.  The other connection/connections may likewise be disconnected after observing the necessary formalities.

So, as per said sales circular, the Ops are only entitled to transfer the balance dues, if any, in the name of the same consumer but in the present case, the connection bearing No.K2/0832 was in the name of Billu Ram and the same was taken for running flour mill, whereas the connection No.K2/0833 is in the name of father of complainant and the same is taken for running tubewell.  The authority submitted by ld. Counsel for the Ops reported as Hari Prasad @ Harish Kumar Vs. MU.H.B.V.N.L., 2010(1) CPC page 293 is not applicable to the present case because the facts of this authority are almost different from the instant case.  So, keeping in view the facts and circumstances mentioned above, we find that the Ops have wrongly transferred the arrears of connection No.K2-0832 in the connection No.K2-0833A and Ops are deficient while rendering services to the complainant.

6.     Thus, in view of above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the Ops to withdraw the arrear amount of connection No.K2-0832 added in the bill bearing connection No.K2-0833A and to issue correct bill to the complainant.  However, the Ops are at liberty to recover the amount bearing connection No.K2-0832 from Billu Ram son of Birbal.  The Ops are also burdened to pay Rs.2,000/- as lump sum compensation on account of harassment, mental agony and cost of litigation charges.  Let the order be complied with within 30 days from the date of communication of order.  A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of cost.  File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced.

Dt.23.07.2015.

                                                                (Jagmal Singh),

                                                                President.

                (Harisha Mehta),     (Rajbir Singh),       

                        Member.         Member.