Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/1052/2010

Babu Ram S/op Ram Chander - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVN LTd. - Opp.Party(s)

Surinder Sangwan

06 Aug 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

 

                                                                                    Complaint No.  1052 of 2010.

                                                                                    Date of institution: 3.11.2010

                                                                                    Date of decision: 6.8.2015.

 

Babu Ram son of late Sh. Ram Chander,  resident of Roop Nagar Colony, Jagadhri, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.            

 

                                                                                                                                                             …Complainant.

                                                               Versus

1. U.H.B.V.N.L.  Shakti Bhawan, Panchkula, through its Chairman.
2. Sub Divisional Officer/Assistant Executive Engineer, UHBVNL, Sub Division Jagadhri City, Code No. Y-31, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.
3. Executive Engineer, U.H.B.V.N.L. Jagadhri, Tehsil Jagadhri, Distt. Yamuna Nagar.

 

                                                                                                                                                              …Opposite parties. 

 

CORAM:          SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT,

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: Sh. Joginder Singh Sagri, Advocate, counsel for complainant.

              Sh. Satish Sangwan, Advocate, for OPs.    

 

ORDER

 

 1.                    Complainant Babu Ram has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 praying therein that necessary directions be issued to the OPs to correct the bill dated 21.10.2010 and waive off the sundry charges of Rs. 8205 and further be directed to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, harassment and further to pay Rs. 11000/- on account of litigation expenses.      

2.               Brief facts of the present complaint as alleged by the complainant are that a domestic electricity connection bearing No. JC13/3289M-Y is installed at his residence and he is paying the bills of consumption regularly in time without any default. It has been further stated that he was surprised to receive the electricity bill dated 21.10.2010 of his abovesaid connection for the period from 21.8.2010 to 21.10.2010 for a sum of Rs. 11,489/- in which the actual consumption charges have been shown Rs. 2952.95 paise and rest amount of Rs. 8205/- have been shown as sundry charges. After receiving the aforesaid bill, he immediately approached the OPs and requested them to correct the same and to remove the sundry charges but instead of acceding the genuine request of the complainant, threatened him to disconnect his electricity connection whereas bill dated 21.10.2010 is wrong, illegal null and void and the same is liable to be quashed but the opposite parties refused to do so, which admittedly is a gross negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, this complaint.

3.                     Upon notice, opposite parties appeared through counsel and filed written statement wherein it has been mentioned that the meter of the complainant was running very slow, hence as per instructions of the Nigam, the amount for slow meter was charged from him in addition to the current consumption charges which is legal and has been rightly charged. In this way, they have not caused any harassment to the complainant as alleged and thus they are not deficient in service as alleged by the complainant. In the end, the opposite parties have requested for ordering dismissal of complaint.

4.                    To prove the case, complainant’s counsel has tendered affidavit of Sh. Babu Ram as Annexure CX and document such as Bill dated 21.10.2010 as Annexure C-1 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.

5.                     On the other hand, counsel for the opposite parties tendered an affidavit of Sh. R.L.Kamboj, SDO (Operation), Sub Division, City Jagadhri  as Annexure RX and and closed the evidence on behalf of opposite parties.

6.                   We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file very minutely and carefully.

7.                   After hearing both the parties and going through the relevant documents, it is admitted on the record that the OPs have sent a bill dated 21.10.2010 for an amount of Rs. 11,489/- in which Rs. 8205/- has been shown as sundry charges. From the perusal of the bill dated 21.10.2010, it reveals that no any period qua imposing of sundry charges amounting to Rs. 8205/- has been mentioned in it. Besides this, the OPs have failed to prove that how the meter of the complainant was running slow. The OPs have also failed to furnish any report of laboratory regarding checking of electricity meter of the complainant and without any documentary evidence; the OPs cannot charge any amount from the complainant merely on the ground that the meter of the complainant was running slow. Counsel for the OPs has also tendered only a short affidavit of the SDO concerned in support of his written statement and except this no any other document has been filed by the OPs to prove their version.  The learned counsel for the OPs totally failed to convince this Forum that in what manner Ops comes to the figures of Rs. 8205/- and in the absence of detailed calculation it cannot be said that OPs have charged the said amount correctly. In these circumstances, we are of the considered view that there is a great deficiency in service on the part of OPs. As such, the complainant is entitled for relief qua waiving off the amount of Rs. 8205/- levied as sundry charges in the Bill dated 21.10.2010.

8.                 Resultantly, we partly allow the complaint of complainant and direct the OPs not to charge the amount of Rs. 8205/- from the complainant which has been shown as sundry charges in the bill dated 21.10.2010. Besides it, the complainant is also entitled for compensation of Rs. 2000/- on account of harassment, mental agony and litigation expenses etc. Order be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of order failing which the complainant shall be entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance. 

Announced in open court: 6.8.2015.

 

                                                                                                (ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                                PRESIDENT

 

          

 

                                                                                                (S.C.SHARMA)

                                                                                                 MEMBER