DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

Brig. R. N. Sharma (Retd.), Maha Vir Chakra, Aged 85 years, R/o H.No.1594, Sector 34-D, Chandigarh.

                                                                                    ---Complainant

V E R S U S

1]       Sub Divisional (Electricity Operation Sub Division No.7), Sector 35-B, Chandigarh.

2]          Sh.K.C.Sharma, son of Sh.Chetan Dev, R/o H.No.1511, Sector 34-D, Chandigarh.

---Opposite Parties

BEFORE:            SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA                    PRESIDENT

                        SMT. MADHU MUTNEJA                   MEMBER

                        SH.JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU            MEMBER

Argued By:            Sh.V.P.Chatrath,  Advocate for the complainant

Sh.Jatinder Singh, G.P. for the OP-1.

                        OP-2 exparte.

PER JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU, MEMBER

1]             Complainant (hereinafter referred to as CC for short) has filed the present complaint against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as OPs for short) on the ground that CC is an old subscriber of OP-1 vide Account No.3407/159401A.  The CC had rented out his residential accommodation along with the said electricity connection to OP No.2.  OP-2 remained in possession of the house for a long duration and was evicted vide orders of the Rent Controller, U.T., Chandigarh on 13.12.2010.  That all these years, CC believed OP-2 to be paying the electricity bills regularly.  However, on the date of taking possession of the premises, CC came to know of the electricity supply being disconnected.

                On making enquiries with OP-1, CC was informed of the disconnection of the electricity w.e.f. 11.12.2010 on the ground that a sum of Rs.95,654/- was outstanding against the CC. 

                CC is aggrieved by the demand of Rs.95,654/- as well as disconnection of electricity by OP-1 to his premises.  As the CC claims that no bill was issued to him for the recovery of said amount, however, a supplementary bill was handed over to him (Ann.C-4), dated 6.12.2010, showing an amount of Rs.91,702/- as Arrears and another amount of Rs.3500/- approx. as energy charges for the period between 04.11.2010 to 15.12.2010. 

                CC prays for the restoration of the electricity connection with immediate effect and seeks directions of waiver of bill of Rs.95,654/- due towards CC, as the same could be recovered from OP-2 by OP-1.

2]             On notice, OP-1 filed their version.

                OP-2, though initially put in appearance through counsel, but thereafter preferred to remain absent.  As such, OP-2 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 17.8.2011.

                OP-1 in their reply has stated that there are two electricity connections in the name of CC bearing Account No.3407/159400Y & 3407/159401A, with sanctioned load of 1.460 KW and 13.220 KW respectively.  That in the case of electricity connection bearing Account NO.3407/159401A, Meter No.CHEP-39373 was removed vide PDCO NO.69/670, dated 03.12.2010, affected on 15.12.2010, as the payment of electricity bills was not made by the CC. 

                In Para-5 (Page-2) of the reply, OP-1 has stated that as a sum of Rs.95,654/- are outstanding against Electricity Account No.3407/159401A, the OP-1 is well within its right to disconnect the electricity connection due to non-payment and the same cannot be reconnected till the CC makes the outstanding payments. A copy of instructions vide Commercial Circular No.2/1995 (Ann.R-2) is attached with the reply. 

                It is also disclosed in Para-6 of the reply that the case of the CC was pending with the Disputes Settlement Committee of the OP-1 and the outcome of which was decided on 25.11.2010 and the CC was informed about the same vide Memo No.5316, dated 09.12.2010 and the CC was asked to make the payment of outstanding amount against him, failing which the electricity supply was disconnected and meter of the CC too was removed. 

                Further on, OP-1 has contested that as the CC was drawing electricity vide electricity meter bearing NO.3407/159400Y at the existing site, as such OP-1 will suffer loss of government revenue due to non-payment of electricity.  OP-1 has submitted details of rules of the Department of Electricity along with reply and the same is annexured as Ann.R-2.

3]             Parties led their respective evidences.

4]             Having gone through the entire complaint and version of OP-1 and the evidence of the parties, we came to the following conclusion:-

i)      It is an admitted fact that the said premises of the CC was on rent during the period of outstanding amount, as claimed by OP-1 i.e. between the period 04.1.2005 to 04.01.2011, as per the details supplied by OP-1 vide Detail Sheet submitted with its reply. 

ii)     It is also clear         from the documents tendered by the CC, namely, Ann.C-5 whereby the possession of residential property of the CC where the said connection was running vide Account No.3407/159401A        , was restored to the CC on 13.12.2010.

iii)    The CC has submitted a supplementary bill bearing 06.12.2010 as Date of Issue and Due Date of Payment by Cheque as 21.12.2010, whereby a demand of Rs.95,654/- is made by OP-1 and the same is signed by SDO Electricity (Operation) (S/D No.7), Sector 35-B, Chandigarh, dated 24.12.2010.  This one document was supplied to the CC when probably he personally went to OP-1 to enquire about the matter.  This particular bill does not carry the Bill Number and is filled up in bare handwriting whereas the Printed Performa is the Stationery material meant to be printed through Computer assisted machine only.

One more surprising aspect that has come to light vide this document Ann.C-4 the Supplementary Bill is that the OP-1 having taken the electricity reading for the period between 04.11.2010 to 15.12.2010 with Electricity Meter showing the readings as 25074-Old & 26217-as New meter readings, resulting into consumption of 1143 Units.

That is how could OP-1 generate a Bill on 06.12.2010 (Date of Issue) in advance to 15.12.2010 when the consumption of electricity was noted , the date when the meter reader visited the premises of the CC to note down the meter readings.  Hence, this one document of OP No.1 cannot be believed as the same is created by them to miss lead the CC and is but a fake defense.

iv)    It is further noticed that even if OP-1 had sent the original bill to the CC at his residence, the due date for payment of Rs.95,654/-, which according to them included the arrears of Rs.91,702/-, was 21.12.2010.  The OP-1 is definitely at fault for not having waited till 21.12.2010, the due date of payment, before disconnecting the electricity supply of the CC i.e. the OP-1 at their own leisure are not honoring their own deadlines as conveyed to the CC. 

v)     The CC has categorically brought to our observation, Section 56(2) of Electricity Act, 2003 dealing with Disconnection Of Supply In Default Of Payment, which speaks as under:-

“Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, no sum due from any consumer, under this section shall be recoverable after the period of two years from the date when such sum became first due unless such sum has been shown continuously as recoverable as arrears of charges for electricity supplied and the licensee shall not cut off the supply of the electricity.”  

According to which the act of cutting of electricity supply of the CC is illegal, as OP-1 has failed to satisfy this Forum of the fact that the arrears outstanding against the CC had been shown continuously as recoverable as Arrears of Charges for the electricity supplied.  As per Section 56(2), mentioned above, OP-1 cannot recover the due amount after the period of 2 years from the date when such sum became first due. 

In the present case, when the OP-1 itself has admitted to the fact that the outstanding arrears pertains to the period of more than 6 years, hence their demand is not in consonance with Section 56(2) of The Electricity Act, 2003, as they have failed to bring any duplicate bills on record whereby it could be established that the demand of arrears was continuously being made to the CC for the past 6 years. Though a bunch of attested sheets are submitted as Annexured-2 and the same is part of their own record. But these documents lead us to nowhere with regard to the fact of continuous intimation of outstanding arrears to the CC.    Hence, in present circumstances, the outstanding arrears only for the past 2 years are recoverable from the CC.

vi)        Moreover, OP-1 has failed to explain their conduct with regard to the fact as to why they slept over the matter for the past 6 years and then they did not even wait till the due date of payment i.e. 21.12.2010 before disconnecting the electricity connection. Though the power to disconnect electricity supply was with them since long and has not been acquired recently. We believe that the contentions of complainant, as mentioned in his present complaint, are correct that OP-1 allowed a complete free hand to the tenant of the CC i.e. OP-2 to abuse the services of OP-1 to his advantage.

Hence, on the above observations, we partially allow the present complaint against OP-1 and direct OP-1 to calculate and recover from the CC only the amount against actual consumption of electricity for a period of last two preceding years from 21.12.2010 (Due Date of payment of last Bill).  We also direct OP-1 to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation along with litigation cost of Rs.5000/- to CC.         

                This order be complied with by OP-1 within 30 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which OP-1 shall be liable to pay an interest @9% p.a. on the total amount of compensation that stands against them after completion of 30 days, besides the cost of litigation.

                However, it is made clear to the OP-1 that in case they have already received the amount in question from the CC, during the pendency of the present complaint, the same be adjusted accordingly and excess be paid back to the CC.

                Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

12.09.2011

                                                           (LAKSHMAN SHARMA)

PRESIDENT

 (MADHU MUTNEJA)

MEMBER 

 (JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU)

MEMBER