BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.99 of 2016
Date of Instt. 03.03.2016
Date of Decision :09.11.2016
Ram Avtar Age 64 years, S/o Late Sh. Heera Lal, 522, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, Jalandhar-8, Mob. No. 9464016496.
..........Complainant
Versus
Sub Divisional Engineer, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Maqsudan, Jalahndhar.
Chairman Cum Managing Director, Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall, Patiala.
.........Opposite parties
Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Sh. Karnail Singh, (President),
Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)
Present: Complainant in person.
Sh.D.R. Seth Adv., counsel for OP No.1 & 2.
Order
Karnail Singh (President)
1. The instant complaint filed by complainant, wherein alleged that he got electricity connection vide account No. 174KRI40374Y, contract No. 3001372542 issued by opposite party NO.1 in the name of complainant at 523, Bhagat Singh Colony, Jalandhar. The complainant is consuming the electricity and paying the amount for electricity consumed from time to time and nothing balance towards complainant. The opposite party No.1 sent a bill dated 2/4/2015 for Rs. 4,840/- payable by due date for the period from 05/02/15 to 02/04/15 showing consumption 297 units. The complainant deposited Rs. 4,870/- which include Rs. 30/- as surcharge vide receipt No. 210004734213 dated 7/7/2015. That in the month of July 2015, the opposite party No.1 sent the bill which included arrear of previous month i.e. Rs. 4870+4000= Rs. 8870/-. When the complainant asked the reason for sending the bill of such huge amount, the opposite party No.1 told the complainant that by mistake the amount of Rs. 4870/- had been added. The complainant shown the receipt dated 7/7/2015 for the deposit of previous bill amount Rs. 4870/-. Then the opposite party NO.1 deducted the amount Rs. 4870/- from Rs. 8870/- and made the amount Rs. 4000/-. The complainant deposited this amount of Rs. 4000/- with opposite party No.1 vide receipt No. 210005055536 dated 22/7/17 and nothing remained balance towards complainant. Intentionally and deliberately, the opposite party No.1 added the previous paid amount Rs. 8870/-(8842/-) in the next bill for the period 17/7/2015 to 18/9/2015 for Rs. 11280/- which included Rs. 8842/- as arrear of previous bill mentioned above. The complainant paid this amount under protest in two installments. At first, the complainant deposited Rs. 6000/- vide receipt No. Kiosk ID 3309 Maqsudan dated 5/10/2015 and after it, the complainant deposited the entire balance amount with penalty/ late fee under protest and nothing remained balance towards complainant. The opposite party No.1 again sent bill for Rs. 6470/- which included previous balance Rs. 3698/- for the period from 18/9/2015 to 9/11/2015. When the complainant asked the reason for addition of previous balance in this new bill, the opposite party No.1 told the complainant that the arrear of bill for the month of July 2015 has been added. The original bill for the month of July 2015 issued by opposite party No.1 has been damaged/ spoiled inadvertently by the complainant. So the complainant requested the opposite party No.1 to issue original copy of bill of July 2015 showing the whole detail so that the complainant may know the status of reading; recorded and the actual amount made by opposite party No.1 in the said bill. When no response of the above said letter of complainant was given, then the complainant demanded the copy of said bill through RTI. In response to above said RTI, the opposite party No.1 given a false and fabricated reply that the bill made on 2/4/2015 and 17/7/2015 have been reversed and further mentioned that the bill of Rs. 9250/- was sent to complainant. The reply given by opposite party No.1 against RTI is absolutely false and fictitious because neither the bills were reversed nor any bill for the amount of Rs. 9250/- was sent. Despite so many requests and several visits made by complainant to opposite party No.1, the opposite party No.1 failed to supply the original copy of bill for the month of July 2015 as demanded by the complainant. Despite giving a legal notice, the opposite parties did not take any action and as such the necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the opposite parties be directed to provide the original copy of bill of July 2015 showing the actual reading and amount and further requested to direct the opposite parties to refund the excess charged amount of Rs. 8842/- and to pay the cost of litigation Rs. 5,000/- and to pa Rs. 50,000/- on account of compensation for harassment and mental agony.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the opposite parties and accordingly both the opposite parties appeared through counsel and filed joint written reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable as the charges levelled are on account of actual consumption charges of the old electric connection account No. KR-14/374Y and contract account No. 3001372542 in the name of the complainant. The charges levelled are rightly and legally charged as per rules, regulations and instructions of the Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. As such there is no deficiency or negligency in service on the part of the opposite parties and further alleged that complainant have no cause of action against the opposite parties and further alleged that complaint is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties and even does not have any locus standi to file the present complaint. On merits, it is admitted that the electric connection has been installed in the house of the complainant as alleged and remaining allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and further submitted that as a matter of fact and record, the bill for 162 days w.e.f. 6/2/2015 to 17/7/2015 for a sum of Rs. 8840/- have been deposited by the complainant as stated above. The bill for a sum of Rs. 11,280/- for 63 days for 903 units w.e.f. 17/7/2015 to 18/9/2015 was issued and the consumer/ complainant did not deposit the entire amount but deposited a sum of Rs. 6000/- on 5/10/2015 and bill of Rs. 11,280/- was issued. A bill for a sum of Rs. 15,042/- w.e.f. 6/2/2015 to 18/9/2015 for 225 days was issued. The amount of Rs. 5794/- already deposited was deducted/ reduced and bill for the remaining amount of Rs. 9250/- was issued and lastly prayed that the complaint of the complainant is without merit and the same may be dismissed.
3. In order to prove his case, complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.CA and supplementary affidavit Ex. CB alongwith documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C11 and then closed the evidence.
4. In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, counsel for opposite party No.1 & 2 tendered into evidence affidavit Ex. OP-1 alongwith documents Ex. OP-2 to Ex. OP-5 and closed the evidence on behalf of opposite party No. 1 & 2.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also gone through the case file very minutely.
6. It is admitted fact that the electricity connection bearing No. 174KRI40374Y has been installed in the house of the complainant. Now question in dispute is whether the excess amount of Rs. 8842/- have been charged by the opposite party from the complainant and further whether the opposite parties failed to supply the copy of bill of July 2015 to the complainant as demanded. In order to establish this factum, the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit Ex. CA as well as supplementary affidavit Ex. CB and also brought on the file electricity bill and receipt, whereby he received the said amount and version of the complainant is controverted by the opposite party. Simply by taking the plea that the charges have been levelled legally, rightly according to regulations and instructions and further alleged that bill for 162 days w.e.f. 6/2/15 to 17/7/2015 for a sum of Rs. 8840/- have been deposited by the complainant as stated above and the bill for a sum of Rs. 11,280/- for 63 days for 903 units w.e.f. 17/7/2015 to 18/9/2015 was issued and the consumer/ complainant did not deposit the entire amount but deposit a sum of Rs. 6,000/- on 5/10/2015 and bill for Rs. 11,280/- was issued. The bill for a sum of Rs. 15,042/- w.e.f. 6/2/2015 to 18/9/2015 for 225 days was issued. The amount of Rs. 5794/- already deposited was deducted/ reduced and the bill for the remaining amount of Rs. 9250/- was issued but the same has not been deposited by the complainant and calculations in regard to this amount has been brought on the file by the opposite parties as Ex. OP-2/ Ex. OP-3.
7. We have considered all facts as well as documents and find that complainant deposited the bill dated 2/4/2015 for amount of Rs. 4870/-, the bill is Ex. C1 and its receipt for deposit of the said amount is available on the file Ex. C2. Similarly the next bill of Rs. 4,000/- was issued and the same was deposited by the complainant vide receipt Ex. C3 but the said amount has been shown in the next bill for the period 17/7/2015 to 18/9/2015, the bill is Ex. C4 which is in amounting to Rs. 11,280/- and the complainant deposited the said amount under protest and receipt of the same is Ex. C5 that receipt is regarding amount of Rs. 6,000/- not to Rs. 11,280/-. Apart from that complainant has also brought on the file some letters addressed by the complainant to the opposite parties which is Mark C7, C11. Complainant has brought on the file a letter Ex. C9 wrote by the OP to the complainant wherein categorically mentioned that the bill dated 23/9/15 issued for the period 6/2/15 to 18/9/15 for 225 days amounting to Rs. 15,042/- and out of that amount. The complainant has deposited Rs. 5794/- and remaining amount Rs. 9250/- is still due. The plea taken in the aforesaid letter Ex. C9 is also taken by the OP in the written reply in sub para No.4 but this plea of the opposite party is not tenable because as per version of the complainant as well as documentary evidence i.e. receipt Ex. C2 and Ex. C3 show that complainant has deposited two amounts to Rs. 4870/- and Rs. 4000/- for a two bills from May and June. It means that complainant has totally deposited Rs. 8870/- which is not denied by the opposite parties rather admitted in para No.4 that the complainant deposited Rs. 8840/- from 6/2/2015 to 17/7/2015 but as per version of the opposite parties, they again issued bill for the period 6/2/2015 to 18/9/2015 for 225 days amounting to Rs. 15,042/- and alleged that out of that amount, the complainant has deposited only Rs. 5794/- whereas as per receipt, the complainant has depsoited Rs. 8840+ Rs. 6000= Rs. 14,400/- if so then there remains not a balance of Rs. 9250/- so it means that the opposite party is charging excess amount from the complainant and opposite parties are directed to prepare the specifically bill showing the consumption of periodically as well as amount and accordingly, we find that there is much substances in the arguments of the complaint.
8. Accordingly, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and opposite parties are directed to issue a proper bill for the month of July 2015 as well as further bill 18/9/2015 as per the consumption of the electricity consumed by the complainant and charges accordingly and not to excess amount be charged form the complainant. Further the opposite parties are directed to make payment of Rs. 2,000/- as compensation to the complainant and Rs.1,000/ as litigation expenses. Entire compliance of the order be made within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If opposite parties fails to comply the order, then complainant is entitled to get interest on the aforesaid amount of Rs.3,000/- @ 9% per annum from the date of filing complaint till realization. Complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
9. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room
Dated Parminder Sharma Karnail Singh
09.11.2016 Member President
