Haryana

Ambala

CC/358/2018

Durga Wanti - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

A.B. Kapoor

24 Dec 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

 

                                                          Complaint case No.          :  358 of 2018.

                                                          Date of Institution            :  26.10.2018.

                                                          Date of decision               :  24.12.2019.

Durga Wanti wife of Datta Ram H.No.26, Ambedkar Colony, Pakki Sarai, Ambala Cantt.

                                                                                       ……. Complainant.

 

1. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Cross Road No.12, Ambala Cantt. through S.D.O. Sub Division No.1

          ..…. Opposite Party.

         

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member.

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.         

                            

Present:       Shri A.B. Kapoor, Advocate, counsel for complainant.

Shri C.S. Bindra, Advocate, counsel for OP.

 

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President

Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) praying for issuance of following directions to it:-

1. To change the meter of the complainant and to refund the amount of Rs.18,753/- taken extra from her.
2. To pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by her.
3. To pay litigation cost.

 

 

Brief facts of the case are that the complainant is having a domestic electric connection  bearing Account No.4419900000. She used to pay the electricity bills regularly. She was usually receiving the monthly bill between Rs.200/- to Rs.300/-. Suddenly, she received a bill for Rs.18,753/-. The said bill issued by the OP is illegal and needs to be rectified. The OP is sending a huge bill, whereas complainant is having only one light and two other small connections in her house. The complainant has been requesting the OP for the last two years to change the meter and refund the extra amount taken by it from her. Since 10.07.2017, complainant visited the office of the OP several times for change of meter, correction of the bills and refund of the extra amount taken from her, but till date no action has been taken by the OP. This is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                Upon notice, OP appeared through counsel and filed written version, raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability, not coming with clean hands, suppressing true and material facts, no locus standi, no cause of action. On merits, it is stated that the complainant is having a domestic electricity connection bearing account No.4419900000, but she is very bad pay master as she had never paid the bills regularly. The last payment of Rs.6732/- was made by the complainant on 24.05.2016 i.e., about three years ago and upto January, 2019, an amount of Rs.22374/- is outstanding against her. Just to delay to make the payment of the electricity bill amount, the complainant has filed the present complaint, which has caused unnecessary financial burden upon the OP. The OP had rightly issued the bill dated 18.07.2018 of Rs.18,753/-, i.e. Rs.1525.29/- for current consumption for the period from 07.05.2018 to 07.07.2018 and Rs.17,218/- as arrear. Complainant is liable to pay the said bill amount. The meter of the complainant is working properly and she never approached the OP for change of the meter. Rest of the allegations levelled by the complainant were denied for lack of knowledge and prayer has been made for dismissal of the present complaint.

3.                The ld. counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of complainant as Annexure CA alongwith documents Annexure C-1 to C-5 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for OP tendered affidavit of Shri Neelanshu Dubey, SDO, Sub Division No.1, UHBVNL, Ambala Cantt. as Annexure OP/A alongwith documents Annexure OP1 to Annexure OP19 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP.

4.                We have heard the learned counsel for parties and carefully gone through the case file.

5.                 The learned counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant sent an application dated 11.12.2015 through registered post Annexure-C3, to the OP for change of meter and also sent a reminder, which was duly received by the OP, as is evident from Annexure-C1.  However, the OP instead of changing the meter had issued a bill dated 18.07.2018 of Rs.18,753/-. The said demand raised by the OP is illegal, therefore, it is liable to refund the amount of Rs.18,753/- taken from the complainant.

                   In rebuttal, the Ld. counsel for the OP argued that the complainant  never approached the OP, for change of meter and the meter installed at her premises is working properly. The OP had rightly issued the bill dated 18.7.2018 of Rs.18753/- (Rs.1525.29 for current consumption of electricity for the period from 7.5.2018 to 7.7.2018 and Rs. 17218.19 paisa as arrear), because the complainant   paid Rs.1732/- last time on 24.5.2016 i.e. about three years ago. The complainant is liable to pay Rs.22,374/- upto January-2019.

6.       From the perusal of the application dated 21.6.2017,  Annexure C-1  it is revealed that the OP received the  said application on 10.7.2017. Thus this contention of the OP that the complainant never approached it for change of meter gets falsified. Even we do not find any merits in this contention of the OP that meter of the complainant is working properly, because no cogent document has been produced by the OP to show that the meter of the complainant was got checked from the M.E. Lab. and it was found ok. Since, no steps were taken by the OP for replacement of the meter, after receiving the application from the complainant on 11.12.2015 and reminder on 10.07.2017, therefore, it has committed deficiency in service. In this situation we are of the view that the OP shall change the meter of the complainant. It shall also issue the bill upto date, as per sale circular no. 61/213, issued on 18.12.2013 by Chief General Manager/Commercial, UHBVN, Panchkula, on average basis, without charging any surcharge/penalty etc.  So far as the request made by the complainant for refund of Rs.18,753/- is concerned. It may be stated here that from the very begging, the stand of the OP was that  complainant did not pay the electric consumption charges after 24.4.2016. The Onus was on the complainant to establish that she had paid Rs.18,753/- of the bill dated 18.7.2018. However, no such documents has been produced by the complainant to prove that she had paid Rs.18,753/- to the OP. Thus the request made by the complainant for refund of Rs.18,753/- can not be accepted.   

7.       In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby partly allow the present complaint and quash the bill dated 18.7.2018 of Rs. 18.753/- and  direct the OP to change the meter of the complainant and  to issue a fresh bill, upto date as per sale circular no. 61/213 of UHVBN, on average basis, without charging any surcharge/penalty etc. The Op is also directed to pay Rs.2000/- as compensation and cost to the complainant. The OP is further directed to comply with the aforesaid directions within the period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced:          24.12.2019

                  

                   (Vinod Kumar Sharma)  (Ruby Sharma)     (Neena Sandhu)

                   Member                         Member                          President