Haryana

Karnal

CC/312/2022

Kanwaljit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

The S.D.O. (OP) Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited - Opp.Party(s)

R.K.Mehta

04 Oct 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                        Complaint No.312 of 2022

                                                        Date of instt.31.05.2022

                                                        Date of Decision: 04.10.2024

 

Kanwaljit Singh aged about 48 years, son of late Shri Surinder Singh, resident of house no.112/63, Ram Nagar, Karnal.

 

                                                                        …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

SDO (OP) Sub Division, Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, Ram Nagar, Karnal.

 

                                                                        …..Opposite Party.

 

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Shri Jaswant Singh……President.     

              Ms. Neeru Agarwal…….Member

      Ms. Sarvjeet Kaur…..Member

 

 Argued by: Shri R.K. Mehta, counsel for the complainant.

                    Shri Sidharth Parkash, counsel for the OP.

 

                     (Jaswant Singh, President)

ORDER:   

                

                The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) on the averments that complainant is having an electricity connection in his house bearing account no.9198520000, which is in the name of his father Shri Surinder Singh who had expired and after his death, the complainant is using the said connection for his own residential purpose. The complainant has been paying the consumption charges/bills regularly to the OP without fail as and when the bill issued to the complainant. Nothing was due towards the complainant. The OP has issued the bill dated 26.07.2019, in which a sum of Rs.1,10,503/- has wrongly been shown. It is pertinent to mention here that prior to this nothing was due against the complainant. Prior to this the official of the OP also sent the wrong amount of the bill to the complainant, then complainant visited the office of OP for the correction of the said bill, the same was corrected by the official of the OP under the scheme issued by the Haryana Government. After correction of the bill(s) the official of the OP asked the complainant to deposit a sum of Rs.19,300/- with the cash counter, the same was deposited by the complainant on 31.12.2018. Thereafter, complainant demanded the said correction statement, but they refused to give the same, then the complainant demanded the same through RTI on 03.06.2021, the same was obtained by the complainant on 22.08.2019. The aforesaid bill is totally wrong, incorrect, illegal and not binding upon the rights of the complainant. It is pertinent to mention here that the electric meter is installed on the pole. The complainant has already deposited the pending amount of the previous bills under the scheme to the OP. The complainant visited the office of OP number of times and requested to withdraw the alleged bill and to rectify/correct the bill but official of the did not bother to correct the bill and are bent upon in recovering the alleged amount of Rs.1,10,503/- alongwith penalty etc. forcibly and illegally without any rhyme and reason. The OP threatened the complainant to disconnect the electricity of the complainant illegally and forcibly on dismissal of the previous complaint for want of prosecution, vide order dated 24.02.2022 and has given liberty to file the fresh complaint.  Bill for the month of April, 2022 issued by OP Rs.7390/- and the same was deposited by the complainant on 24.05.2022. The complainant has suffered great mental agony, pain at the hands of the OP for which the OP is liable to pay the damages to the tune of Rs.50,000/- on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence this complaint.

 2.            On notice, OP appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; jurisdiction; cause of action; locus standi and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that the complainant was not paying the consumption charges regularly from the date of installation of the meter. From 30.06.2013 to 17.03.2015, the complainant only paid an amount of Rs.10,000/- on 17.03.2015 to 19.09.2016 he paid only Rs.50/- in the office of OP. Hence as on 13.10.2017, an amount of Rs.1,84,028.42P became due towards the complainant regarding the actual consumption of electricity charges. Out of this amount, an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was paid on 31.10.2017 through two cheques of Rs.50,000/- each but both the said cheques were not encashed by the banker of the complainant. Thereafter, Nigam started sending the bills of previous arrears and actual consumption and on 31.12.2018, an amount of Rs.1,27,625.30p was stand due towards the complainant. Thereafter, complainant visited the office of OP and had shown his willingness to settle his account as per the scheme of compromise of the Nigam and then rebate an amount of Rs.99,044/- was given to him. The complainant was entitled for said rebate, if he agrees to pay current energy charges. The complainant issued a cheque of Rs.19,300/- of current energy charges but on presentation said cheque was again dishonored by the banker of the complainant. Then complainant paid an amount of Rs.19,300/- in cash to the OP. Thereafter, he has not paid any amount till 27.09.2019. After that he paid an amount of Rs.3789/- only qua current energy charges. The OP has rightly issued the bill dated 26.07.2019 to complainant as the same is regarding actual consumption of electricity. So, the correction of the bill does not arise at all. It is further pleaded that the complainant is not entitled for any kind of benefit of the scheme of the Government as he has not complied with the terms of said instructions of the Nigam. 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 complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, copy of RTI Ex.C1, copy of electricity bills dated 31.12.2018, 14.05.2019 and 31.12.2018 Ex.C2 to Ex.C4, copy of investigation form Ex.C5,  hospital record Ex.C6, copy of payment receipt Ex.C7, copy of electricity bill dated 12.05.2022 Ex.C8 and closed the evidence on 07.11.2022 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP has tendered into evidence affidavit of Aditi Rana Ex.OP1/A, copy of summary of bills and payment receipts Ex.OP1 to Ex.OP3, copy of cheque Ex.OP4, copy of return memo Ex.OP5, copy of cheque dated 20.09.2017 Ex.OP6, copy of return memo Ex.OP7, copy of summary of bills payment Ex.OP8, copy of electricity bill dated 14.05.2019,31.12.2018 and 27.10.2018 Ex.OP9 and closed the evidence on 04.08.2023 by suffering separate statement.

6.             We have heard the learned for the parties and perused the case file carefully and also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

7.             Learned counsel for complainant, while reiterating the contents of the complaint, has vehemently argued that complainant is having domestic electricity connection in his house and has been paying the electricity consumption charges regularly to the OP and nothing was due towards the complainant. In the month of December 2018, Government of Haryana launched a scheme for settlement of the pending electricity bills. As per the said scheme, total payable amount was Rs.19,300/- and complainant deposited the said but OP again sent the bill dated 26.07.2019 for an amount of Rs.1,10,503/-, which is not as per actual consumption. On receipt of said bill, complainant approached the OP several times and requested to correct the said bill but OP did not pay any attention to the request of complainant and refused to correct the same and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Per contra, learned counsel for the OP, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that complainant was irregular for paying the consumption charges from the date of installation of the meter. On 13.10.2017, an amount of Rs.1,84,028.42P was due and complainant presented two cheques of Rs.50,000/- each but both cheques were not encashed by the banker of the complainant due to insufficient fund. As per scheme of the Nigam, a rebate for an amount of Rs.99,044/- was given to complainant and complainant was only entitled for said rebate if he paid the current energy charges but complainant  has not deposited the current consumption charges regularly. Complainant submitted a cheque of Rs.19,300/- but the said cheque was again dishonoured by the banker of the complainant and then complainant deposited the said amount in cash to the OP. After that complainant deposited Rs.3798/- on 27.09.2019 and thereafter nothing was deposited by the complainant. The OP has rightly issued the bill dated 26.07.2019 as per actual consumption of electricity. Now the complainant is not entitled for the benefit of the scheme as he has not complied with the instructions of the Nigam and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

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

 10.          On 31.12.2018 an amount of Rs.1,27,625/- was due towards the complainant. As per scheme of the Nigam, rebate an amount of Rs.99044/- was given to the complainant. The complainant was entitled for the said rebate only if, he agree to pay the current energy charges. On adjustment of the due amount an amount of Rs.19300/- was paid by the complainant on 31.12.2018. After that he paid an amount of Rs.3789/- till 27.09.2019 qua the current consumption charges regularly. Neither prior to the scheme nor availing the benefit of the scheme, complainant has paid the current energy charges.  If the complainant wanted to take the benefit of the said scheme, he should had to deposit the current consumption charges regularly, but he remains defaulter for paying the current consumption charges regularly. Neither the complainant nor the OP has placed on file copy of the said scheme. There is nothing on the file that complainant has paid the electricity bill regularly after availing the benefit of the scheme as per the actual consumption.

11.           Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, the present complaint is devoid of merits and same deserves to be dismissed and same is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced
Dated:04.10.2024

         President,

      District Consumer Disputes                            

      Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

                   ( Neeru Agarwal)            (Sarvjeet Kaur)

                             Member                         Member