Haryana

Ambala

CC/215/2016

Sarjan Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVN Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sandeep Saini

30 Jan 2018

ORDER

 

                              BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

                                                                         FORUM, AMBALA

 

                                                          Complaint case no.        :  215 of 2016

                                                          Date of Institution         :  18.05.2016

                                                          Date of decision   :  30.01.2018

 

Sarjan Singh son of Pritam Singh son of Nathu Ram, resident of Village Banondi, Tehsil Naraingarh, Sub Division  Shahzadpur, District Ambala.

    ……. Complainant.

 

                                                          Vs.

 

1.       Uttar Haryana Bijli Nigam Ltd. Shakti Bhavan, Sector-6, Panchkula through its Secretary.

2.       Assistant Executive Engineer (Operation), Sub Division Shahzadpur, Distrit Ambala.  

 

 ….…. Opposite Parties

 

 

Before:        Sh. D.N.Arora, President,

                   Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member.

                            

 

Present:       Complainant in person with Sh. Sandeep Saini, Advocate.  

                   Sh. A.S.Nehra,  counsel for the Ops.

 

ORDER:

                   In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint are that the complainant has having a domestic connection bearing account No.YIZBL240029X. The present complainant is son of late Shri Pritam  Singh and after the death of his father Shri Pritam Singh, he is using the  electricity connection for domestic purposes. The present complainant was surprised and shocked to received the bill dated 13.01.2016 for an amount of Rs. 54,373/-. The amount of bill is totally exorbitant and not digestible. From June, 2015 the complainant had shifted to House No.788, Sector-26, Panchkula alongwith his family members. Therefore, no one is residing in the house since 01.07.2015. The present complainant only used to come at his house at Banondi only after 15/20 days. That the previous consumption for last six months, prior to issuance of this period bill is reproduced as under:-

Bill Month                             Units                           Status

FEB                                         1017                           O/OK

APR                                          772                           O/OK

JUN                                          846                           O/OK

AUG                                           59                            O/MIN

OCT                                            12                            O/MIN

DEC                                            27                            O/MIN

 

But in the month of January, 2016 the complainant received the bill dated 13.01.2016 as received by the complainant is for the unit consumer  in the month of December and in the month of December as shown in the bill, the complainant has consumed only 27 units. Therefore, such a exorbitant bill issued by the opposite parties is totally an arbitrary action. He further stated that no demand other than electricity charges to be calculated on the basis of units shown by the meter installed in the premises of a consumer cannot at all be raised without any basis, details, exact and correct calculation as per the electricity laws, Rules, Regulations and the general  principles of fair play and natural justice. The demand has been raised by the opposite parties unilaterally, without actually visiting the site without giving any action oriented notice or opportunity to the complainant. Hence,the present complaint.

2.                 Upon notice, OPs appeared through counsel and tendered written statement raising preliminary objections qua complaint is not maintainable, no cause of action, locus standi and not come to the court with clean hands. On merits, OPs stated that the electricity meter of house of the complainant was earlier lying dead and he was being sent average bill and after installation of New Meter as per Govt. Instructions, he was issued bills as per instructions of Nigam. The account of consumer so billed, finally be corrected on the basis of average consumption of succeeding six months after the installation of correct meter and after calculating the average consumption of new meter, which came out 946 units, but the OP considered lower unit, which came out 840 and according to this average units, the bills were issued to the complainant by including the consumption average of overhauling the defective period upto 04/2012 to 5/2014 and thus the complainant is liable to deposit  the same with the OPs. So, there is no deficiency on the part of the OPs and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

3.                To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure C-X alongwith documents as annexure C-1 to C-2 and close his                          evidence. On the other hand, counsel for OPs have also tendered affidavit as Annexure R-X(SDO) alongwith documents as annexure R-1 to R-2 and closed their evidence.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the case file.   During the course of the arguments counsel for the OPs made a separate statement that as per Sale circular No.U-51/2017 and  as per intimation from the Department  scheme was extended up to 31.03.2018 and if the complainant’s case falls under said scheme (out of court settlement scheme) then his case will be considered as per the scheme stated above providing an application to the concern SDO regarding the benefit of the scheme by the complainant.

We have perused the sale circular i.e. scheme for out of court settlement, the case of the complainant  falls under the above said scheme because dispute in the present case is pending since 18.05.2016 prior to the date  mentioned in the scheme i.e. 31.10.2017, so the OPs are directed to settle the case of the complainant as per the scheme, if complainant submits the requisite application for settlement then OPs will decide the  matter taking into consideration the above said settlement scheme as early as possible. Accordingly, the present complaint is disposed off. Copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules.  File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

  Announced on :  30.01.2018

                                      

  (ANAMIKA GUPTA)                              (D.N. ARORA)

Member                                      President