Haryana

Ambala

CC/337/2014

ANIL KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVN LTD - Opp.Party(s)

Representative

07 Sep 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

                                                           Complaint No.:337 of 2014.

                                                           Date of Instt.: 05.12.2014.

                                                           Date of Decision: 07.09.2017.

 

Anil Kumar son of later Sh.R.C.Shukla, 55/219 Satsang Bhawn Baldev  Nagar at present resident of 2290, Baldev Nagar, Ambala City through his brother B.N.Shukla.

                                                                             …Complainant.

                             Versus

 

Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited through its Sub Divisional Officer, Model Town Ambala City.

 

                                                                             …Opposite Party.

 

             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:                Sh. B.N.Shukla, representative for the complainant.

                             Sh. Vikas Sharma, counsel for the opposite party.

 

ORDER:

                             Briefly stated the facts of the present complaint are that complainant is having electricity connection bearing account No.MT-45-2629 M (Old account No.B3-1649) at his residence. He has been making the payment of electricity bills regularly for the period from 15.12.2013 to 15.06.2014 but the Op had sent a bill for Rs.15352/- for 3100 units whereas the actual consumption of the complainant is about 275 units as shown bill for the month of 15.12.2013 to 15.02.2014 and the status of the meter has been shown as OK.  The meter cannot record 3100 units for the period of six months as the actual consumption till date was 18229 and the consumption in the month of August 2014 has been shows as 17541 which shows that only 688 units have been consumed during four months.  The OP has issued inflated bill without reading the actual consumed units. The complainant has approached the OP to correct the inflated bill and to deduct the amount already paid but to no avail. The act and conduct of the OP clearly amounts to deficiency in service on its part. In evidence, the complainant has tendered affidavit Annexure CX and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C7.

2.                          On notice, OP appeared and contested the complaint by filing its reply wherein preliminary objections such as maintainability and cause of action etc. have been taken. It has been submitted that as per actual consumption the OP had sent the bills for the period of 15.02.2014 to 15.04.2014 and 15.04.2014 to 15.04.2016 for 278 and 238 units respectively as the premises of the complainant was found locked during this period and the employee of the Nigam could not record the reading.  The bill for the period from 15.06.2014 to 15.08.2014 for 3100 units was sent as per last reading. The complainant had not paid even a single penny for the period from 15.02.2014 to 15.08.2014 and further the OP had sent a bill for the period from 15.08.2014 to  15.10.2014 for 360 units but the complainant had deposited only 1500/- as part payment on 20.11.2014.  In the bill in question the old reading has been shown as 14441 and new reading was 17541 and the bill for 3100 units has been shown as per last reading. Other contention made in the complaint have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. In evidence the OP has tendered affidavits Annexure RX, Annexure RY and documents Annexure R1 and Annexure R2.

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

4.                          The complainant through his representative has place on record written argument and argued that the OP has issued the inflated electricity consumption bill for the period from February, 2014 to August, 2014 by showing the units as 3100 despite the fact that the only 275 units were consumed during this period and the OP had not deducted the amount already paid during this period when the house was locked and bill was received by the complainant. The previous average consumption of units of the bills of the complainant was 300 units. In support of his contentions he has placed copy of bill for the period from 15.08.2014 to 15.10.2014 as Annexure C2 on the case file wherein consumption of the units have been shown as 360 units.  He further placed on record copy of bill Annexure C3 (disputed bill) for the period from 15.02.2014 to 15.08.2014 wherein the consumption of units has been shown as 3100. He further drew the attention of this Forum towards Annexure C4 i.e. bill for the period from 15.02.2014 to 15.06.2014 wherein the consumed units have been shown as 238. In Annexure C6 i.e. bill for the period from 15.12.2013 to 15.02.2014 the consumed units have been shown as 275. It has been further argued that after considering all the bills it clearly shows that the OP has issued inflated bill i.e. disputed bill Annexure C3 for the period from 15.02.2014 to 15.08.2014 and further submitted that the bill in question be corrected and the amount already paid be deducted in the fresh bills.

 5.                         On the other hand counsel for the OP has placed on record affidavit of the meter reader as well as the record of the meter reading sheet Annexure R1 for the period 02/2014 to 12/2014 in which at Sr. No.3 the old units has been shown as 14441 and new units have been shown as 17541 which shows the consumed units as 3100 and this fact is also mentioned in the Data of Account of meter of the complainant. It has been further argued that the reading for the months of 05/14 and 07/14 have been shown as Zero because the premises of the complainant was found locked during this period. It has been further argued that bill in dispute has been issued for actual consumption units and the Nigam is entitled to recover the same from the complainant.

6.                          The point for determination before this Forum is that as to whether the opposite party has rightly issued the bill for an amount of Rs.15352/- to the complainant or not? A perusal of the impugned bill reveals that the meter has been shown as OK and complainant did not dispute about the correctness of the meter. Though he had moved an application (Annexure C7) to the Nigam for correction of the bill as well as for taking action against the erred meter reader but he had not requested to get the meter checked from M&T Lab in the said application.  The opposite party has taken a specific stand that the bill in dispute issued to the complainant to the tune of Rs.15352/- is correct on the basis actual consumption and this fact is clearly supported by Annexure R1 and Annexure R2 because the reading for the months of 05/14 and 07/14 have been shown as Zero because the premises of the complainant was found locked during this period. There is nothing on the file to show that the bill in question had been issued wrongly and illegally therefore, it was obligatory on the complainant to deposit the amount as shown in the bill in question being legal and genuine but instead of depositing the electricity bill with the Nigam the complainant has approached to this Forum without any reason by twisting the facts. The act and conduct of the complainant clearly shows that the complainant in order to avoid the payment the actual consumption bill he has approached this Forum despite the fact that he was legally bound to pay the same.

7.                            In view of the aforementioned discussion we are of the considered opinion that the complaint deserves dismissal being devoid of any merit. It is ordered accordingly. There is 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: 07.09.2017                                               (D.N. ARORA)

                                 PRESIDENT                

 

 

(ANAMIKA GUPTA)                                               (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

     MEMBER                                                             MEMBER