Haryana

Karnal

CC/530/2022

Gurmeet Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sub Divisional Officer (OP) Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Ravi Chauhan

20 Sep 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

                                                        Complaint No.530 of 2022

                                                        Date of instt.09.09.2022

                                                        Date of Decision:20.09.2023

 

Gurmeet Singh son of Shri Har Charan Singh, resident of house no.21L, Model Town, Karnal.

                                               …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

Sub Divisional Officer (OP) UHBN Ltd. Sub Urban Division Sector 12 Karnal.

 

                                                                …..Opposite Party.

       

Complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.

              Sh. Vineet Kaushik……Member 

      Dr. Rekha Chaudhary……Member

          

 Argued by: Shri Ravi Chauhan, counsel for the complainant.

                    Shri Kavinder Singh, counsel for the OP.

 

                    (Vineet Kaushik, Member)

ORDER:                     

          

                 The complainant has filed the present complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) on the averments that complainant is permanent resident of abovesaid address and is 100% disable. Complainant is consumer of OP and having electricity connection bearing no.8919120000, which is a domestic connection. Uptil 10.10.2020, the electricity bill of said connection has been rightly coming and same as duly paid by complainant but in the month of 12/2020 the complainant has received a bill of Rs.82897/-which is totally incorrect and receipt of said notice the complainant visited the office of the OP and requested for rectify the same. On this OP stated that he will get checked the meter and then rectify the mistake. The abovesaid huge bill has been issued owing to the reason that the meter has jumped and  the complainant requested for replacement of the said meter but same was not replaced by the OP. The OP went on sending the bill and adding surcharge and interest on that amount. In the month of August, 2021 bill for an amount of Rs.100336/- was issued by the OP and complainant again visited office of OP and requested for testing his meter and overhauling his account as per his actual consumption of the electricity, then the OP asked the complainant first of all to deposit Rs.40000/- then he will get replaced the meter and accordingly under protest deposited an amount of Rs.40000/- on 30.09.2021. Thereafter, complainant approached the OP for overhauling his account but the OP went on postponing the matter on one pretext or the other and went on sending bill by debiting surcharge and interest on that amount. Since the meter working in house of complainant is defective and as such in the month of March, 2022 said meter was burnt and then the complainant moved an application to replace the said meter but the OP again started to postpone the matter on one pretext or the other and lastly refused to do so without getting depositing the entire outstanding amount. The demand of Rs.82897/- in the bill of complainant is quite illegal, null and void and not binding on the rights of the complainant as said amount is neither due nor recoverable from the complainant. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. Hence this complaint.

2.             On notice, OP appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus standi and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that the electricity connection bearing no.8919120000 is running in the name of complainant with sanctioned load 5KW. It is further pleaded that complainant not paid bill dated 10.10.2020 issued to complainant because the bill dated 10.10.2020 was a minus bill for amount (-) 2630/- only which could not payable. Further, it is submitted that the reading of meter were updated in the bill dated 31.12.2020 for period 09.08.2020 to 09.12.2020 for 122 days with provisional/BR adjustment of (-) Rs.86526/- only sent to consumer. It is further pleaded that the bill in question has been sent to the complainant on actual consumption but complainant failed to deposit the same. The complainant made payment of Rs.9027/- only on dated 27.08.2020 and made part payment of Rs.40000/- only on 30.09.2021 out of total bill Rs.100336/- only and last paid 25% Rs.20724/- only part payment of total disputed amount on dated 21.09.2022 as per court order. It is further pleaded that the bills sent to the consumer is quite o.k. and when complainant visited the office of OP for getting corrected his bill, then he made understand that there is no mistake in his bill and as such he has to deposit the same but he did not bothered for same and filed this false and baseless complaint. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, copy of electricity bill dated 30.06.2022 Ex.C1, copy of application dated 30.09.2022 Ex.C2, electricity bill detail w.e.f. 27.08.2020 to 30.06.2022 Ex.C3, copy of disability certificate of complainant Ex.C4 and closed the evidence on 14.11.2022 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP has tendered into evidence affidavit of Vinay Kumar, AEE Ex.OP1/A, copy of electricity bill dated 09.12.2022 Ex.OP1, copy of bill dated 31.12.2022 Ex.OP2, copy of account detail Ex.OP4, copy of report dated 16.03.2022 Ex.OP5, copy of LL1 checking report Ex.OP6, copy of lab report dated 10.10.2022 regarding checking of meter in M&T lab Ex.OP7, copy of checking report Ex.OP8 and closed the evidence on 14.07.2023 by suffering separate statement.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

7.             Learned counsel for the complainant, while reiterating the contents of complaint, has vehemently argued that complainant is consumer of OP and paying the electricity consumption charges regularly. Complainant received electricity bill dated 09.12.2020 to the tune of Rs.82897.23, which were very huge amount. After receiving the said bills complainant visited the office of OP to get correct the said bill but the same has not been corrected after repeated requests. He further argued that complainant is ready to pay the bill as per actual consumption and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Per contra, learned counsel of OP while reiterating the contents of the written version, has vehemently argued that the reading of meter was updated in the bill dated 31.12.2020 for period 09.08.2020 to 09.12.2020 for 122 days with provisional/BR adjustment of (-) Rs.86526/- only sent to consumer. He further argued that bill in question has been sent to the complainant on actual consumption but complainant has failed to deposit the same. The complainant made payment of Rs.9027/- on 27.08.2020, Rs.40000/-  on 30.09.2021 and Rs.20724/- on 21.09.2022 as per court order and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.             We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

10.           Admittedly, complainant is having a domestic connection bearing no.8919120000 with the sanction load of 5KW. It is also admitted that prior to 10.10.2020, complainant had paid the entire electricity bills. It is also admitted that complainant made a payment of Rs.9027/- on 27.08.2020, Rs.40,000/- on 30.09.2021 and Rs.20,724/- on 21.09.2022.

11.           In the month of December, 2020 complainant received a bill of Rs.82,897.23paise and the said bill has been challenged in the present complaint on the ground that the bill issued by the OP is not as per the actual consumption.

12.           On 30.09.2021, complainant moved an application Ex.C2 to the OP with the averments that to rectify the electricity bill as per actual reading. Despite of rectifing the bill, the premises of the complainant was checked by the checking party on 04.10.2022 and meter was removed and sent to the M&T laboratory for testing of the meter. As per laboratory report Ex.OP8, the meter could not be checked due to badly burnt. It is not the case of the OP that complainant was found by committing the theft of electricity at any point.

13.           The OP has alleged that the bill in question is for the period 09.08.2020 to 09.12.2020 for 122 days, the system of the computer systematically/automatically adjusted the average bill issued to the complainant and adjusted as provisional/BR adjustment (-) of Rs.86,522/-. But OP has miserably failed to prove that on what basis they have calculated the huge reading for that period when the meter of the complainant was remaining in burnt condition. This fact has  been proved from the checking/inspection report of meter, M&T Lab, Karnal. Undisputedly, after passing the order dated 14.09.2022, OP issued the subsequent electricity bills as per the actual consumption and complainant is paying the same regularly.  Hence, it has been proved that the OP has sent the bill on the basis of presumption and assumption, not as per the actual consumption. Thus the demand of the OP in the disputed bill amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

 14.          Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the OP to overhaul the account of complainant and to issue the electricity bills according to the average of meter-reading of succeeding six months and receiving the consumption charges without imposing any surcharge and penalty and also adjust the amount, which was paid by the complainant during the disputed period and by court order. This order shall be complied with within 45 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance. 

Announced

Dated:20.09.2023                                                                     

                                                                President,

                                                    District Consumer Disputes

                                                    Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

 (Vineet Kaushik)       (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)

  Member                   Member