BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.
Complaint no.168/13.
Date of instt.: 19.08.2013.
Date of Decision: 12.05.2015.
Madan lal Wadhwa S/o Sh. Narain Dass, r/o Village Siwan, Tehsil & Distt. Kaithal.
……….Complainant.
Versus
1. Sub Divisional Officer (OP) Sub Division Siwan, Sub Division Code K-36, Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. Siwan, Distt. Kaithal.
2. Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., Shakti Bhawan, Sector-6, Panchkula, through its Secretary.
..……..Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
Before: Sh. Rajbir Singh, Presiding Member.
Smt. Harisha Mehta, Member.
Present : Sh. Anil Chutani, 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 electricity connection No.X36KS110295M being beneficiary and has been paying the bills regularly. It is alleged that on 25.07.2013 the Op No.1 along with other officials while checking the electric meter installed at the premises of complainant by using electric gazettes wherein they found the same as O.K. with intact seals which fact has duly been shown in the report dt. 25.07.2013 but either due to some problem in the electric meter or otherwise due to any other reason including some jump/fluctuation in the electric meter, surprisingly the same started to show the reading of 16009.6 units consumed comparatively to the total units shown in the last month bill i.e. 3101 units and thereby showing the consumption of total units i.e. 16009.6-3101=12898.6 units within the period of two months i.e. 06.05.2013 to 27.07.2013. It is further alleged that the complainant moved an application before the official concerned of the Ops and thereby requested to withdraw the LL-I notice issued to him and further correct the reading shown in the electric meter by rectifying the problem in the same, which is installed at the premises of complainant. It is further alleged that despite of moving an application as per the advise of Ops, no positive action whatsoever was taken against it rather a bill dt. 28.07.2013 for the period 06.05.2013 to 07.07.2013 was sent by showing the consumption of 12898.6 units. The said bill is wrong, illegal and excessive. 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 facts are that the connection bearing account No.KS-11/0295 still stands in the name of Narain Dass with connected load of 7.5 K.W. and all the bills are issued and paid in his name. On 25.07.2013, Sh. Kuldeep Singh, J.E. along with staff checked the above-said meter. At the time of checking, reading was found 16009.6 and meter working was found O.K. In the bill of month of 7//2013, the old reading was 3101 and new reading was found 3422. However, during the above-said checking, the reading was found 16009 i.e. difference of reading was found 12586 (16009-3423=12586), so, a bill amounting to Rs.92,537/- was issued to the above-said consumer in which Rs.98,954/- were claimed as sundry charges being difference amount of units of 12586 along with current bill, in this bill, Rs.14,796/- were shown as credit amount. As the above-said official consumer did not deposit this bill, so, a bill amounting to Rs.1,11,239/- was issued in the month of 11/2013, in which Rs.92,537/- were claimed as balance amount along with current bill. So, all the bills issued to the official consumer are legal, valid and justified as issued as per actual consumption. 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 having electricity connection No.X36KS110295M and has been paying the bills regularly. On 25.07.2013 the Op No.1 along with other officials while checking the electric meter installed at the premises of complainant by using electric gazettes wherein they found the same as O.K. with intact seals which fact has duly been shown in the report dt. 25.07.2013 but either due to some problem in the electric meter or otherwise due to any other reason including some jump/fluctuation in the electric meter, surprisingly the same started to show the reading of 16009.6 units consumed comparatively to the total units shown in the last month bill i.e. 3101 units and thereby showing the consumption of total units i.e. 16009.6-3101=12898.6 units within the period of two months i.e. 06.05.2013 to 27.07.2013. The complainant also moved an application on 26.07.2013 (Ex.C3) to the Ops regarding the correctness of reading of meter but the Ops did not take any action on the said application so far. In this regard, we are guided with the instructions of U.H.B.V.N. and as per instruction No.116, it has been mentioned as under:-
Difference or Dispute over the Accuracy.
Where any difference or dispute arises as to whether any meter is or is not correct, the matter should be decided, upon the application by either party by the Electrical Inspector under Section 26(6) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, as amended from time to time and if in his opinion, the meter is not correct, the Electrical Inspector shall estimate the amount of adjustment to be carried out in the consumer’s account for a period not exceeding six months preceding the date of test.
So, we are of the considered view that there is deficiency in service on the part of Ops in rendering services to the complainant.
7. Thus, in view of above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the Ops to overhaul the account of complainant and adjust all the paid bills according to the average of meter-reading of preceding six months from the date of disputed bill. 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.12.05.2015.
(Harisha Mehta), (Rajbir Singh),
Member. Presiding Member.
