BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH ======== Consumer Complaint No | : | 373 of 2005 | Date of Decision | : | 04.05.2011 |
Sukhwinder Pal s/o Lachman Dass Thakur r/o 3456/2, Sector 23, Chandigarh. ….…Complainant V E R S U S 1. Superintendent Engineer, Electricity Department, UT, Sector 9, Chandigarh. 2. Sub Divisional Officer, Electricity Wing, Sector 23, Chandigarh. ..…Opposite Parties CORAM: SH.P.D.GOEL, PRESIDENT SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER DR.(MRS) MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA MEMBER Argued by:Sh. Munish Goel, Adv. for complainant. Sh.Jatinder Singh, GP for OPs PER P.D.GOEL, PRESIDENT The complainant namely Sh.Sukhwinder Pal has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (as amended upto date) “hereinafter referred to as the Act”. In short, the facts of the case are that the complainant is owner of House No.3456/2, Sector 23, Chandigarh since 28.04.2002 but the electricity meter installed therein is still in the name of previous owner Sh.Som Parkash. The complainant is regularly paying the electricity bills to OPs since 28.04.2002. It is the case of the complainant that OP-2 changed the earlier electricity meter with the new electronic meter in Feb. 2004 without his consent. The complainant averred that OP issued illegal and unjustified bill bearing No.84781 dated 01.05.2005 for Rs.19,952.90P on account of sundry charges. In the said bill, 490 units have been recorded to be consumed by him and as such the total amount comes to Rs.950/- only. The complainant brought the said fact in the notice of OPs and also requested to rectify the said bill but to no effect. Ultimately, the complainant served a legal notice (Annexure C-3) upon OPs. According to the complainant, OPs have illegally included Rs.19,952.90P as sundry charges in the bill dated 18.5.2005, hence, this complaint. 2. OPs filed joint written statement and took some preliminary objections and denied the averments of the complaint made in the complaint. On merits, it is admitted that the electricity meter bearing A/c No.2310/345602 is in the name of Sh.Om Parkash. It is also admitted that old electricity meter was changed with new one on 10.08.04 as old electricity meter was dead stop. It is further replied that the amount of Rs.19952.90 has been claimed on the objection raised by the audit party. While issuing the said bill, average from 03.12.99 to 10.0.2004 for 56 months on the basis of new meter consumption i.e. 338+270+685= 1293/6= 216 units per month (Annexure R-2) was taken into account without giving any notice to the complainant. It is pleaded that the complainant was allowed to make payments in installments. It is stated that the legal notice was duly replied. Denying all the material allegations of the complainant and pleading that there has been no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. 3. Parties led evidence in support of their contentions. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and the learned GP for the OP and have also perused the record. 5. Admittedly, the demand of Rs.19,952.90 as sundry charges has been raised from the complainant by the OPs on the objection of the audit party. It is also an admitted fact that the OPs added the amount of Rs.19,952.90 in the bill dated 18.05.2005 as sundry charges. 6. To decide the present controversy, it will be relevant to reproduce the Rule 124.1 of the Sales Regulations of Electricity Board which reads as under:- "There may be certain cases where the consumer is billed for some of the dues relating to the previous months/ years or otherwise as the arrears on account of under assessment/load or demand surcharge pointed out by internal audit/detected by the authorized officers either owing to the negligence of Board's employees or due to some defect in the metering equipment or due to application of wrong tariff/multiplication factor or due to mistake in connection or other irregularities/malpractices etc, in all such cases, the separate bill should be issued giving details of the charges levied. Such charges should not be clubbed in the current bill of the consumer. 7. The careful scrutiny of Rule 124.1 referred to above makes it clear that where the consumer is billed for some dues on account of demand pointed out by the auditor of the OP-Department, the separate bill be issued by giving complete details of the charges levied and such charges should not be clubbed in the current bill of the consumer by the Board. 8. The disputed bill is Annexure C-1 qua which the amount of Rs.19,952.90P has been added as sundry charges and allowances , therefore, it is held that the OPs have violated the rule No. 124.1 referred to above. The OPs should have issued a separate bill by giving complete details of the charges, thus, it is held that the demand raised by the OPs is not legal and it violates Rule No.124.1 referred in para supra. That the OPs were under legal obligation to give notice to the complainant with regard to the disputed amount before raising the said demand. Admittedly, the OPs have not issued any notice to the complainant with regard to the demand in question, therefore, on this count also, the demand is liable to be quashed. 9. As a result of the above discussion, it is held that there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, thus, the complaint is accepted and the demand of Rs.19,952.90P raised as sundry charges through bill No.84781 dated 01.05.2005, Annexure C-1 is quashed. Litigation expenses are assessed at Rs.2000/-. However, OPs are at liberty to issue the separate bill giving the complete details of charges and, if aggrieved, the complainant had a right to challenge the same in the court having the jurisdiction in the matter. The OPs are directed to comply with the order within one month from the receipt of copy of the order. 10. The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned. | Sd/- | | Sd/- | Sd/- | 04.05.2011 | [ Madanjit Kaur Sahota] | | [Rajinder Singh Gill] | (P.D.Goel) | cm | Member | | Member | President |
| | MR. RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. P. D. Goel, PRESIDENT | DR. MRS MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER | | 
