Date of Filing : 16.09.2011
Date of Disposal: 18.07.2012
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ANANTAPUR.
PRESENT: - Sri T.Sundara Ramaiah, B.Com., B.L., President (FAC)
Sri M.Sreelatha, B.A.,B.L., Lady Member
Sri S.Niranjan Babu, B.A., B.L., Male Member
Wednesday, the 18th day of July, 2012
C.C.No.146/2011
Between:
Smt. T.Anjali Devi,
W/o T.Chinna Rao,
Secretary to D.R.M./GTL,
D.No.12-78, S.N.Pet,
Guntakal,
Anantapur District. … Complainant
Vs.
1. The Superintending Engineer,
A.P.C.P.D.C.L. JNTU Road,
Anantapur.
2. The Assistant Engineer,
A.P.C.P.D.C.L.,
Guntakal,
Anantapur District. … Opposite Parties
This case coming on this day for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri G.Kesavaiah Advocate for the complainant and Sri N.Ravikumar Reddy, Advocate for the Opposite Parties 1 & 2 and after perusing the material papers on record and after hearing the arguments of both sides, the Forum delivered the following:
O R D E R
Sri S.Niranjan Babu, Male Member: - This complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite parties 1 & 2 to deduct total bill of December, 2010 which was issued for a sum of Rs.18,399/- and to order to normal charges per month and to replace the old meter with a new one and also to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony and costs of the complaint.
2. The brief facts in complaint are that: - The complainant is a permanent resident of Guntakal and she is working as Secretary to DRM/GTL. The 1st opposite party is the power supply corporation established as A.P.C.P.D.C.L and the 2nd opposite party is the head office of the 1st opposite party. The complainant herein purchased a house D.No.12-78 situated at S.N.Pet, Guntakal on 21.11.2008 and the said house was already having electricity connection and the service bearing No.0101008814. After purchasing the house the complainant demolished the said house and reconstructed the house in the year 2009-10 and a new meter was also installed in the ground floor on 05.07.2010 with service No.0101034124 and the old meter i.e., service bearing No.0101008814 was installed to the first floor. The complainant herself resided in the first floor and the complainant was regularly paying the electricity charges as per the demand notices issued by the 2nd opposite party regularly without any delay or dues. The complainant is not due any arrears to the electricity department and the electricity charges were approximately around Rs.150 to 250/- per month up to Novemeber, 2010. But surprisingly in the month of December, 2010 the complainant has received electricity charges for sum of Rs.18,399/- for the consumed units of 3387. After receiving the said bill the complainant approached the 2nd opposite party on 27.12.2010 and gave a written complaint regarding the meter reading and it has jumped in to thousands of units in a month and also requested the 2nd opposite party to pursue the matter and change the demand notice to normal charges per month and also to replace the defective meter with a new meter.
3. The complainant consumed around 30 to 40 units per month on an average and to prove the same some of the previous bills are filed. The complainant submits that there was a defect in the meter and hence the meter reading has jumped into thousand of units in the month of December, 2010. The complainant further submits that the 2ndopposite party instead of replacing the meter with a new one, threatened the complainant that the power supply will be cut, if the complainant did not pay the bill arrears immediately. Hence, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.4,000/- on 25.07.2011. The complainant further submits that as per the energy billing system for consumption, billing, collection and arrears history during the period of January, 2004 to July, 2011 for the said service number clearly shows that in the month of July 2010, the complainant used to consume the power normally but the power consumption reading was only 1 unit for that month. This shows that the meter is defective one and requested the 2nd opposite party to replace the defective meter with a new one.
4. Further the complainant submits that in the month of May, 2011 the complainant installed Air Conditioner to her house and after installing the A.C. the consumption of power was more and the bill was raised to 365 units for the month of May and June only and the same is not disputed by the complainant. Though the complainant gave written complaint to change the defective meter, the opposite parties did not change the meter and they have not taken any action in this regard. Hence the complainant filed this complaint against the opposite parties 1 & 2.
5. The 1st opposite party filed counter stating that the allegations made in the complaint or not true and they are invented for the purpose of this case. The allegation that the 2nd opposite party issued a bill for sum of Rs.18,399/- is not true. Further the 2nd opposite party submits that on the requisition of the complainant the concerned officer verified the meter and rectified the bill. The 1st opposite party further state that the meter was in good working condition showing the correct readings as per the consumed units. The 1st opposite party states that the readings are taken by the private agencies and not by the department person and as per the reading given by the private agency people the demand notice will be issued to the consumer. Hence, there may be a mistake by the meter reader. Subsequently after requisition by the complainant the concerned A.E. verified the meter and rectified the bills.
6. The 1st opposite party further submits that as the meter was in good working condition there is no necessity to replace the meter, as the bill was rectified. Hence, there is no deficiency of service on the part of this opposite parties.
7. The 2nd opposite party filed a memo adopting the counter filed on behalf of the 1st opposite party.
8. Basing on the above pleadings, the following points that arise for consideration are:-
i) Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties 1 & 2?
ii) To what relief?
9. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the complainant has filed his evidence on affidavit and marked Exs.A1 to A8 documents. On behalf of the 1stopposite party, the 1st opposite party filed evidence on affidavit and no documents are marked on behalf of the 1st opposite party.
10. Heard both sides
11. POINT NO 1:- The case of the complainant is that she is a permanent resident of D.No.12-78 S.N.Pet, Guntakal. The complainant had a electricity service connection bearing No.0101008814 and she was regularly paying the electricity charges as per the demand notices of the 2nd opposite party regularly and the billing of the electricity charges was around 30 to 40 units per month since January, 2004, as per the statement issued by CPDC of A.P. Limited. But in the month of December, 2010 the complainant received a demand notice for a sum of Rs.18,399 for the consumed units of 3387 in that month. Subsequently the complainant approached the 2nd opposite party on 27.12.2010 and gave a written complaint regarding the meter reading as the meter reading had jumped to thousand of units in a month and also requested the 2nd opposite party to pursue the matter and to change the demand notice to normal charges as per the previous months and also to replace the defective meter with a new one.
12. As per arguments made by the complainant and even as per the statement filed by the complainant which is marked as Ex.A2 shows the particulars of the meter readings and the units consumed and the amount charged for the month since January, 2004 to June 2011. As per the statement filed the normal monthly billing was on an average of 35 to 50 units per month and it is only in the month of December, 2010 the meter reading and the units consumed is shown as 3387 units for the said month and the bill was for a sum of Rs.18,399/-. After receiving the said bill the complainant made a written requisition to verify the meter and rectify the defect in the billing and also to change the defective meter with a new one.
13. But as there was no response from the opposite parties and instead they made demand to pay the arrears and if not paid they will disconnect the power supply. As the opposite parties threatened the complainant to pay the arrears amount, the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.4,000/- on 25.07.2011. Subsequently the complainant got issued a legal notice 0n 13.08.2011 to the opposite parties 1 & 2 requesting them to change the defective meter with a new one and also to adjust the defective billing in the month of December, 2010. Even after receiving the said notice by the opposite parties 1 & 2 there was no proper response from the opposite parties. Hence the complainant filed this complaint against the opposite parties claiming compensation and also to direct them to change the defective meter with a new one.
14. The counsel for opposite parties argued that they never issued demand notice for a sum of Rs.18,399/- and after receiving a complaint from the complainant the concerned officer verified the meter and found no defect in the meter. As there was a wrong committed by the private agency who prepared the bill, an amount of Rs.9,612/- was credited in the month of March,2011 bill. The counsel for the opposite parties argued that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.
15. After hearing the arguments and perusing the documents it clearly shows that the complainant power consumption was around 30 to 50 units per month as per Ex.A2 statement issued by the opposite parties and it is only in the month of December, 2010 that the consumed units was shown as 3387 units and the demand was for a sum of Rs.18,399/- which clearly shows that there is a defect in the meter. And after receiving the said demand notice, the complainant made a written complaint requesting to change the defective meter and also to rectify the bill amount as per their monthly consumption. But the opposite parties failed to rectify the bill as per the previous bills and the opposite parties did not change the defective meter which showed wrong reading as per their statement December,2010 wherein the reading consumed in that month was shown as 3387 units this shows that there is negligence on the part of the opposite parties. The opposite parties failed to replace the defective meter with a new one and also failed to adjust the total amount in the future bills of the complainant. Only a sum of Rs.9,612/- was adjusted as per the legal notice issued by the complainant which is marked as Ex.A4. Admittedly even in Ex.A2 statement also there is a credit of Rs.9,612/- given but not the full amount of Rs.18,399/-
16. In the above circumstances we are of the view that the opposite parties committed deficiency of service to the complainant by not adjusting the excess bill amount paid by the complainant and also did not change the defective meter with a new one. Hence the opposite parties are liable to adjust the excess amount collected from the complainant and also to replace the defective meter.
17. In the result the complaint is allowed by directing the opposite parties 1 & 2 to change the defective meter of the complainant and also to adjust the excess amount collected by the opposite parties in their future bills and further direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards deficiency of service and Rs.1000/- towards costs of the complaint within 30 days from the date of this order.
Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in open Forum, this the 18th day of July, 2012.
Sd/ - Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT (FAC)
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT:
NIL
ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOISITE PARTIES
-NIL-
EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT
Ex.A1 Photo copies of electricity bills in respect of S.C.No.0101034124.
Ex.A2 Statement relating to consumption, billing, collection and arrears for the period
January 2004 to July 2011 issued by the 2nd opposite party.
Ex.A3 Photo copy of letter dt.18.01.2011 submitted by the complainant to the
2nd opposite party.
Ex.A4 Office copy of legal notice dt.13.08.2011 got issued by the complainant to the
opposite parties 1 & 2.
Ex.A5 Postal receipts for sending legal notice to the opposite parties 1 & 2.
Ex.A6 Postal acknowledgement signed by the opposite parties 1 & 2.
Ex.A7 Photo copies of electricity bills in respect of S.C.No.0101008814.
Ex.A8 Photo copies of electricity bills in respect of S.C.No.0101008814.
EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES 1&2
NIL
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT (FAC)
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR
