BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 283 of 2019
Date of Institution : 27.05.2019
Date of Decision : 28.11.2019.
Sunita Rani aged about 37 years wife of Shri Ramesh Kumar, resident of Near Hanuman Mandir, Back Side of Dhaga Factory, village Chattergarh Patti Sirsa, Tehsil and District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Superintending Engineer, Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. Sirsa.
2. Executive Engineer, Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. Industrial Area Sirsa.
3. Sub Divisional Officer, Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., Industrial Area, Sirsa District Sirsa.
..…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI R.L. AHUJA…………….. PRESIDENT
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR………….. MEMBER
Present: Sh. Anoop Sinwar, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Vijay Sharma, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
In brief, the case of complainant is that complainant is the consumer of the opposite parties in respect of domestic electricity connection bearing account number 0633083433 which is running for last several years and complainant has been making payment of consumption charges regularly to the ops and she was never declared defaulter in this regard. It is further averred that in the house of complainant only small electricity equipments are installed and no heavy electricity equipments are installed. She has been using the electricity as per her need. That if the electricity bills issued by ops to the complainant upto December, 2018 are perused, the same would reveal that the average consumption charges are not more than Rs.1000/- to Rs.1500/- per month but in the month of March, 2019, the complainant has received a bill for the period 11.1.2019 to 7.3.2019 vide which the ops have claimed a sum of Rs.43,379/- from the complainant showing Rs.39658/- as arrears as Rs.3721/- as current cycle charges. It is further averred that on receipt of this huge bill, the complainant approached the ops regarding issuance of wrong bill and requested the ops to confirm the readings and to re-issue the bill as per actual consumption and also requested to inspect the meter and to remove the defect, if any or in the alternate to replace the meter. That the officials of ops visited the house of complainant, inspected the meter and found the same to be faulty and stated that issuance of excess bill is only the result of fault in the meter. The officials removed the meter from the spot with the assurance that a fresh meter shall be installed and bill in question shall be rectified and a fresh bill shall be issued to her. It is further averred that thereafter a fresh meter has been installed and fresh bill has also been received by complainant which is showing average consumption of units which clearly shows that there was fault in the earlier meter and excessive bill has wrongly been issued to the complainant and thus she is entitled to get the said bill rectified. That now for the last 4-5 days, the officials of ops are visiting the house of complainant and are asking her to deposit the amount of aforesaid disputed bill and are threatening that in case the amount of bill is not deposited, the electricity connection shall be disconnected and disputed amount shall be recovered from her coercively and a case shall also be registered against her under the relevant provisions of Electricity Act, whereas the ops have got no legal right and authority to do so. That the complainant approached the ops and requested to withdraw the aforesaid bill and to issue fresh bill as per actual consumption of units and further requested the ops not to disconnect her electricity connection and not to effect recovery of disputed amount but they have flatly refused to admit the claim of complainant about two days ago. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that complainant failed to pay the consumption charges regularly and there was outstanding arrears since month of December, 2018. There were outstanding arrears of Rs.6045/- and the bill for the month of November, 2018 to January, 2019 was issued to the complainant, which bill was thereafter revised on the basis of actual reading/ consumed units found in M.R.B.D. (Meter Reading Bill Distribution) System, which is part of online billing system of the Nigam and thus bill of Rs.38,534/- (Rs.39,657/- payable after due date) was issued but complainant failed to pay the said bill and thereafter, she was served with next bill for the month of March, 2019 for Rs.43,379/- (Rs.44,644/- payable after due date) and the complainant also failed to pay the consumption charges of said bill. Thereafter, she was served with next bill for the month of May, 2019 for Rs.49,966/- (Rs.51,424/- payable after due date). The complainant failed to pay the consumption charges since December, 2018 and she is bound to pay the consumption charges of actual consumed units. It is further submitted that bill in question was issued to the complainant as per M.R.B.D. System which is correct and there is no fault or defect in the meter. The complainant never approached or requested the ops Nigam and even she did not deposit even a single penny to the ops Nigam despite several demands made by the nigam officials. The complainant has concocted a false story. As a matter of fact, old meter bearing Sr. No. 8024562 make Landis, capacity 10-40, reading- 7662 KWH was removed vide service job order No.901/24 dated 9.4.2019 and a new meter bearing Sr. No. 39555296 was installed at the premises of complainant and old meter was sent to Laboratory. The old meter of complainant was checked in the Lab. on 26.4.2019 and during checking, the working of meter was found within permissible limit as reading moved from 7662.6 KWH to 7663.7 KWH. Thus, there is no fault in the meter and meter was found OK, which clearly shows that the bill issued to the complainant was on the basis of actual consumed units. It is further submitted that complainant intentionally avoided to make the payment of the actual consumption charges and has filed the present false complaint with an oblique motive. The complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum, hence she is not entitled to get any relief. It is further submitted that Nigam is legally entitled to recover the amount of bills in question from the complainant. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
3. The parties then led their respective evidence.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.
5. The complainant in order to prove her complaint has furnished her affidavit Ex.CW1/A in which she has deposed and reiterated all the averments made in the complaint. She has also furnished copies of receipts and bills as Ex.C1 to Ex.C11. On the other hand, ops have furnished affidavit of Sh. Ravinder Singh SDO as Ex.R1, copy of service job order Ex.R2, copy of lab. report Ex.R3, copy of bill detail Ex.R4 and copies of bills Ex.R5 to Ex.R7.
6. It is undisputed fact that complainant is holding an electric connection and consuming electricity against bills issued by ops, but however, complainant received a bill for the period 11.1.2019 to 7.3.2019 vide which ops have claimed a sum of Rs.43,379/- from the complainant showing Rs.39,658/- as arrears and Rs.3721/- as current cycle charges. The complainant approached the ops to check the meter as she has not consumed such units and on her request, the meter has also been replaced but complainant was not satisfied with the bills issued by the ops.
7. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for complainant has strongly contended that bill issued by ops is illegal and excessive and complainant is not liable to pay the same. On the other hand, learned counsel for ops has also contended that after verifying all the facts and reading of the meter of complainant, fresh bill has been issued and complainant can visit the office of ops and can verify all these facts personally, if she so requires. So, it will be in the fitness of things, if present complaint is partly allowed and ops are directed to overhaul the account of complainant in her presence.
8. In view of above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to overhaul the account of complainant in her presence after serving 15 days prior notice to the complainant and thereafter to make fresh demand, if any by giving sufficient time of more than 15 days to pay the payable amount without any penalty. We further direct the opposite parties to consider the request of the complainant for grant of rebate/ concession on the payable amount, if any as per scheme of the Nigam of rebate/ concession during the relevant period to be granted to the consumers like complainant. No order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated: 28.11.2019. Member District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
