Haryana

Ambala

CC/182/2015

Deepak Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVN Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

In person.

14 Nov 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

                                                           Complaint No.:182 of 2015.

                                                           Date of Instt.: 03.07.2015.

                                                           Date of Decision: 14.11.2017.

 

Deepak Kumar s/o Late Sh.Nathu Singh, village Khudda Kalan, District Ambala.

                                                                             …Complainant.

                             Versus

 

1. UHBVN Ltd. through its SDO ‘OP’ S/Divn. UHBVN Babyal, Tehsil & District Ambala.

2.UHBVN Ltd. through its XEN ‘OP’ UHBVN Dhulkote, Ambala City.

 

                                                                             …Opposite Parties.

 

             Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

 

CORAM:        SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.                                                            

                        MS.ANAMIKA GUPTA, MEMBER.

 

Present:                None for complainant.

                             Sh.Saravjeet Singh, counsel for the opposite parties.

 

ORDER               

                             Briefly stated the facts of the present complaint are that complainant is having electricity connection bearing account No.YD24-1077 M (Old account No.KHB582) at his residence and the same is in the name of his father late Sh.Nathu Singh. He has been making the payment of electricity bills regularly as per actual consumption of energy and there was no complaint of any kind. On 12.06.2015, the Op no.1 has issued a bill No.01475 dated 12.06.2015 for a sum of Rs.24412/- wherein an amount of Rs.20968/- has been shown as sundry charges. The complainant requested the OPs to correct the error in the bill but to no avail. The act and conduct of the Ops clearly amounts to deficiency in service on their part. In  evidence, the complainant has tendered affidavit Annexure CX and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C3.

2.                          On notice, OPs appeared and contested the complaint by filing joint reply wherein it has been submitted that the complainant is not consumer of OPs as the meter stands in the name of Sh.Nathu Singh, father of the complainant and there is no privity of contract between the complainant and OPs.  The meter installed against the electricity connection remained defective during the period from August 2012 to April, 2015 and during this period the bill was sent on provisional basis and as such the account for this period was liable to be overhauled as per the instructions of the Nigam contained in civil circular No.U-6/2007, U-29/2011 and U-15/2014 after the defective meter was replaced with new meter and on the basis of overhauling of account a sum of Rs.20,927/- became due to be paid by the complainant and in the bill dated 12.06.2015 said amount has been shown as sundry charges. Other contentions made in the complaint have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.  In evidence, the OPs have tendered affidavit Annexure RX and document Annexure R1.

3.                          We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the evidence and documents on the file carefully.

4.                          As per the details made in Annexure R1, it is clear that the meter of the complainant remained defective and the OPs had charged the bill on average basis. Perusal of Annexure R1 further reveals that the OPs had charged the bill from August 2012 to April, 2015 and they have charged the bill on average basis/minimum basis and the account of the complainant was overhauled on the basis of the reading recorded of new meter. It is not disputed that the OPs had sent the notice Annexure C1 whereby an amount of Rs.14913/- has been demanded, however, the OPs have sent the bill Annexure C3 wherein an amount of Rs.20968/- has been shown as sundry charges. Perusal of Annexure R1 it is clear that the OPs have overhauled of the complainant from the period from June, 2012 to April, 2015 after deducting the amount deposited by the complainant on average/minimum basis. The complainant has not rebutted the notice allegedly issued by the OPs by leading cogent and reliable evidence. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the Ops as they have rightly overhauled the account of the complainant on the basis of new meter, therefore, we have no hitch to reach at a conclusion that Annexure R1 is genuine and authentic document and the complainant is bound to pay the charges of electricity charges, therefore, the present complaint has no merits. Accordingly, we dismiss the same with no order as to costs.  Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

 

 

ANNOUNCED ON: 14.11.2017                                               (D.N. ARORA)

                                 PRESIDENT                

 

 

 

(ANAMIKA GUPTA)                                               (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

     MEMBER                                                             MEMBER