Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/350/2014

Lal Deen s/o Kher Chand - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVN Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

None for complainant.

27 Mar 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR AT JAGADHRI.

                                                                                    Complaint No. 350 of 2014.

                                                                                    Date of institution: 21.08.2014

                                                                                    Date of decision: 27.03.2017.

Lal Deen aged about 55 years son of Shri Kher Deen, resident of Village Ledi, Tehsil Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna Nagar.                                                                                    

                                                                                                                 …Complainant.

                                    Versus

1. U.H.B.V.N.L. through its Secretary, Sector-6, Shakti Bhawan, Panchkula. ‘
2. XEN, U.H.B.V.N.L., Yamuna Nagar.
3. The S.D.O. (Operation), U.H.B.V.N.L. Sub Division, Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna Nagar.

 

                                                                                                    ...Respondents.

BEFORE:       SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: None for complainant.  

              Sh. Zile Singh, Advocate, counsel for respondents.

 

ORDER (ASHOK KUMAR GARG PRESIDENT)

 

1.                         Complainant Lal Deen has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection 1986. 

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that the complainant is having domestic electricity connection bearing account No. Y33JH262191H at his premises and he is paying the electricity consumption charges regularly. On 11.01.2012, the complainant had deposited consumption charges of 1893 units in the office of respondent No.3 (hereinafter respondents will be referred as OPs). Thereafter, the complainant never received any bills regarding the consumption of electricity charges. Not only this, the meter of the aforesaid connection of complainant has become disordered and the complainant reported the matter to OP No.3 several times but the official of OP No.3 did not pay any heed to the just and genuine request of complainant. Now, in the month of July, 2014, the complainant was astonished to receive a bill of Rs. 16,104/-. Thereafter, the complainant approached the officials of OP No.3 and requested them to rectify the aforesaid bill as the complainant has deposited the electricity consumption charges of 1893 units and the units shown in the aforesaid bill is 2699 and in this way the complainant is liable to pay consumption charges of only 806 units as such the aforesaid bill is highly excessive. The officials of Op No.3 deducted only an amount of Rs. 420/- out of the aforesaid amount of Rs. 16,104/- and corrected the bill as Rs. 15,684/-. It has been further mentioned that the officials of OPs told to the complainant that the bill has been issued to him on average basis. The complainant visited the office of OP No.3 several times and requested them to correct the bill but they did not pay any heed to the genuine request of the complainant. Lastly, prayed for directing the OPs Nigam to correct the bill of the complainant with immediate effect and further to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses.

3.                     Upon notice, OPs Nigam appeared and filed its written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as complaint is not maintainable; complainant has no cause of action; complainant has got no locus standi or cause of action against the OPs to file and maintain the present complaint; consumption bill of the electricity being used by the complainant was sent to the complainant regularly. All the bills were issued as per actual consumption and the bills dated 04/2014, 06/2014 and 08/2014 were issued on average basis which has been disclosed to the complainant. In case, the complainant was not in receipt of consumption bill after 11.01.2012, he never enquired about the same from the OP No.3.  Hence, the balance amount till 10/2014 to the tune of Rs. 18,358/- is liable to be paid by the complainant and on merit controverted the plea taken in the complaint and reiterated the stand taken in the preliminary objections and lastly prayed for dismissal of complaint.

4.                     Counsel for the complainant failed to adduce any evidence, hence his evidence was closed by court order on dated 28.03.2016. However, at the time of filing of complaint complainant tendered short affidavit alongwith electricity bills Ex. C-1 & C-2 in support of his complaint.

5.                     On the other hand, counsel for the OPs Nigam placed on file short affidavit of Ashish Chopra, SDO, UHBVNL, Chhachhrauli as Annexure RA and document such as photo copy of ledger of account as Annexure R-1 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs Nigam.  

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

7.                     It is not disputed that the complainant is having an electricity connection bearing account No. Y33JH262191H at his premises. As per complaint, the only grievances of the complainant is that the OPs Nigam issued a false bill in the month of July, 2014 amounting to Rs. 16,104/-, upon which, the complainant approached to the OPs Nigam but the OPs Nigam deducted an amount of Rs. 420/- and corrected the bill as Rs. 15,684/- only whereas the entire bill was liable to be quashed. However, from the perusal of the interim orders, it reveals that none is appearing on behalf of the complainant from the last so many dates. Even the evidence of the complainant was closed by court order vide order dated 28.03.2016.

8.                     Learned counsel for the OPs argued at length that the bill in question has been issued as per actual consumption to the complainant and draw our attention towards the copy of ledger Annexure R-1 and argued that since February, 2012 complainant has not paid even a single penny to the OPs Nigam.

9.                     We have also perused the copy of ledger Annexure R-1 from which it is duly evident that since February, 2012 till 10/2014 not a single penny has been paid by the complainant. Further, we have also perused the bills placed on file by the complainant these bills have been issued as per actual consumption. We have also not noticed any irregularity or ambiguity in the account statement filed by the OPs Nigam as Annexure R-1. Moreover, in the absence of any cogent evidence on behalf of complainant, we have no option except to dismiss the present complaint.

10.                   Resultantly, in the circumstances noted above, we are of the considered view that there is no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced: 27.03.2017.

                                                                                                (ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                                 PRESIDENT

                                                                                                 DCDRF, YAMUNANAGAR.  

                                   (S.C.SHARMA )

                                    MEMBER