DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, NORTH-WEST

       GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

      CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.

CC No: 144/2015

D.No.______­­____________                          Dated: _________________

IN THE MATTER OF:

Smt. MAYA SIL/TARUN KUMAR-USER,

S/o SH. ASHOK KUMAR SIL,

R/o 65/21, NEW ROHTAK ROAD,

DELHI-110005.  … COMPLAINANT

Versus

TATA POWER DELHI DISTRIBUTION LTD.,

(A TATA POWER & DELHI GOVT. JOINT VENTURE),

NDPL HOUSE, HUDSON LINES,

KINGSWAY CAMP, NEW DELHI-110009.                    … OPPOSITE PARTY

CORAM:SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT

               SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER

     MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER

                                                            Date of Institution: 28.01.2015

                                                           Date of decision: 25.06.2020

SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT

ORDER

1.       The complainant has filed the present complaint against OP under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 thereby alleging that the complainant is one of the domestic consumer bearing CA No. 60010092611 of OP and has been utilizing the electricity supply of OP for the last so many years and the complainant has been regularly paying the electricity consumption bill as per the itemized bill generated by OP from time to time, however, few months back,

CC No. 144/2015                                                                           Page 1 of 6

          i.e. in the month of July-2014, the complainant observed that the meter was running fast as the bills are being generated comparatively high and accordingly, the complainant vide complaint no. 2007654701 dated 22.07.2014 raised the said issue with the customer care centre for the fast running of the said meter and requested the concerned authority of OP for inspection of the said meter and the said authority/official of OP assured the complainant that the same shall be resolved immediately to the satisfaction of the complainant. On 20.08.2014, the officials of EAC of OP visited the residential premises of the complainant and inspected the electricity meter and the said officials did not investigate qua the grievances of the complainant pertaining to the high reading of the electricity consumption meter rather made a false inspection report of tampered sticker seal and broken meter and the said officials of OP also seized the said meter for lab testing. Thereafter, as per the rule, OP sent the said meter for testing and accordingly the complainant received a notice dated 20.08.2014 for personal appearance to witness the testing/investigation by 3^rd party/in-house team at the meter testing laboratory, Rohini, New Delhi on 01.09.2014 and accordingly, testing/investigation was conducted and an energy meter observation report dated 03.09.2014 was provided by the Electronics and Quality Development Centre and contentedly, falsifying the inspection report of OP and it was revealed in the report that after segregation

CC No. 144/2015                                                                           Page 2 of 6

          of the said meter in the lab, no abnormalities was found inside the meter and on the other hand, substantiating the claim of the complainant it was found in the said investigation that meter LCD and LED were faulty and blinking abnormally. The complainant further alleged that instead of rectifying the faulty electric meter, OP vide the show cause notice dated 15.09.2014 called upon the complainant to show cause why a case of theft of electricity be not finalized against him and a bill of same should not be raised against him and further directed the complainant to appear in person or through an authorized representative before the Enforcement Assessment Cell, Rohini, New Delhi and the complainant appeared before the concerned official of OP on 07.11.2014 and as per their directions, the complainant vide letter dated 13.11.2014 filed response and OP admitting the fact of the faulty meter vide refund letter dated 19.12.2014 and refunded a petty amount of Rs.572/- for the period from 01.06.2014 to 06.08.2014 and as per the law as laid down under Electricity Act, it is clearly stipulated that the service provider shall have to refund the charged/billed amount of 6 months in case of discovery of faulty meter.

2.       On these allegations the complainant has filed the complaint praying for direction to OP to refund the excess billed amount for the entire period in lieu of the faulty meter from the date of the installation of the faulty meter at the premises of the complainant, also direct OP not to disconnect the electric connection of the said

CC No. 144/2015                                                                           Page 3 of 6

          new meter till the disposal of the present complaint as well as compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing harassment, mental agony, pain and has also sought Rs.25,000/- as cost of litigation.

3.   OP has been contesting the case of the complaint andfiled replyand submitted that the complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. OP further submitted that the said electricity connection is registered in the name of Ms. Maya Sil bearing CA No. 600100 92611 with sanctioned load for 6 KW under the DL tariff category and the subject meter was tested on 25.07.2014 and during meter testing – ELT LED glow on external load hence meter found not fast, 2^nd segment of meter found defective hence meter was replaced and ELT LED glow on external load and number of revolutions/pulse found 6400 which is in order hence meter found not fast. OP further submitted that EAC inspected the subject site on 20.08.2014 and subject meter was referred for independent 3^rd party meter testing and as per testing and as per testing remarks-“meter segregated in lab & no abnormalities found inside the meter” and in absence of conclusive evidence and high CP and negative lab report, DAE was dropped on 19.11.2014. OP further submitted that during meter testing-ELT LED glow on external load and meter pulses found in order hence meter reading was working in order but its 2^nd segment was defective which requires to be replaced but it did not affect on the working of meter reading.

4.      The complainant filed rejoinder and denied the contentions of OP.

CC No. 144/2015                                                                           Page 4 of 6

5.      In order to prove his case, the complainantSh. Tarun Kumar filed his affidavit in evidence and also filed written arguments. The complainant also placed on record copy of inspection report as well as copy of Action Report no. 279114 & copy of seizure memo no.28403 dated 20.08.2014of old meter, copy of notice of OP to M/s. EQDC for testing of meter, copy of Meter Testing Laboratory report, copy of quality checklist for enforcement inspection, copy of Energy Meter Observation Report, copies of Electronics & Quality Development Centre reports, copy of Show Cause Notice dated 15.09.2014, copy of reply dated 13.11.2014 sent by the complainant to OP through speed post, copy of letter dated 19.12.2014 of OP w.r.t.refund of amount of Rs.572/-, copy of calculation chart as well as the meter reading shown by the new meter for the calculative period, copy of electricity bill dated 19.12.2014 and copy of notice dated 09.01.2015 by the complainant to OP for re-assessment.

 6.     On the other hand, Sh. Dinesh Kumar, AR of OP filed his affidavit in evidence which is as per defence taken by OP in the written statement. OP has also filed written arguments.

7.      This forum has considered the case of the complainant as well as the OP in the light of evidence of the parties and documents placed onrecord by the parties and submissions of parties.

8.      The letter dated 19.12.2014 issued by the OP to the complainant itself shows that OP has admitted that the Bill has been revised on account of the fact that the meter is faulty and OP has

CC No. 144/2015                                                                           Page 5 of 6

         refunded/adjusted the amount of Rs.572/- in current Bill of the complainant. However, it is the case of the complainant that as per provisions of the electricity Act, the service provider shall refund the charged/billed amount of six months in case of discovery of faulty meter. The old meter which was installed at the premises of the complainant has been found to be faulty and that is why OP has issued letter dated 19.12.2014 and refunded/adjusted amount of Rs.572/- in the Current Bill. OP ought to have refunded/adjusted excess amount on the basis of average consumption for the last six months also and failure on the part of OP amounts to deficiency in service. OP is accordingly held guilty of deficiency in service and is directed as under: -

i)       OP is directed to refund/adjust the excess billed amount for the period of six months preceding the period of determination of faulty meter and to give benefit of the same to the complainant.

9.      The above order shall be complied by OP within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order.

10.    Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on this 25^th day of June, 2020.

BARIQ AHMED                         USHA KHANNA               M.K. GUPTA

  (MEMBER)                                  (MEMBER)                   (PRESIDENT)

CC No. 144/2015                                                                           Page 6 of 6

UPLOADED BY: SATYENDRA JEET