BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

Gurdial Singh s/o Sardar Desa Singh, age 79 years, r/o H.No.54, Sec-C, Defense Colony, Ambala Cantt.

          ……. Complainant

                                                Versus

1. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitaran Nigam through Its Sub Divisional Officer, Sub Division- A-14-Babyal, Ambala Cantt.
2. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitaran Nigam through Its Executive Engineer, Operation Division, U.H.B.V.N., Ambala.

                                                                                         ….…. Opposite Parties

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                      Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member,

          Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.           

Present:       Shri Ashutosh Aggarwal, Advocate, counsel for the complainant.                                                                                                                      Shri G.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate, counsel for the OPs.

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

1.                Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

 (i) To declare the impugned wrong, illegal and arbitrarily raised electricity bill for the month Jan 2021 of Rs.2,57,619/- and March 2021 of Rs.5,22,717/-, illegal & null and void.

(ii) To charge for the actual consumption of electricity for the disputed period to till date.  

(iii) To investigate the wrongly assessed energy consumption bills while comparing the same with the previous year’s bills.

(iv) To install new electricity meter in the premises of the  complainant.

(v)  To pay Rs.25,000/- on account of deficiency in service.

(vi)    To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and                 harassment.

(vii)   To pay Rs.50,000/- as loss of reputation and adopting unfair                  trade practice.

(viii)  To pay Rs.11,000/- as litigation charges.

                             OR

Grant any other relief, which the Hon'ble Commission may deems fit.

2.             Brief facts of the case are that the electricity meter bearing Account No.A14YD163444L of 5.9 KW of Domestic Supply stands in the name of the complainant, which is installed outside the premises/house situated at Sec-C, Defense Colony, Ambala Cantt and is easily accessible independently by the meter reader/s of the OPs to note the readings/energy consumption of the meter. The complainant is old age retired citizen and is law abiding person and is maintaining himself by meeting both the hands. He had been paying the bills for consumption of electricity against the said connection regularly without any default and the usage is in a very moderate way as under:-

3.           The OPs have employed meter readers who are having the primary duty of noting down meter readings of the electricity meter and also to put remarks in the register (maintained in the course of official duty) if there is any fault in the functioning of the electricity meter of any consumer. The meter readers of the OPs in discharge of their official duty kept on issuing the electricity bills to the complainant and the complainant also duly paid all the electricity bills as and when demanded. The complainant was shocked when all of a sudden an electricity bill of Rs.2,57,619/- in the month of Jan 2021 which was payable upto 17-02-2021 ( Annexure C-3) i.e. for Jan 2021 total units consumed were shown as 33360 (57992-2463200). After receiving the defective and false electricity bill, the complainant approached the OPs and requested to check the meter as the complainant was using the electricity in a very moderate way since long as is evident from the record maintained in the office of OPs. The complainant was informed by the OPs to deposit the necessary charges for installation of new electricity meter and further to check and test old electricity meter. Thereafter on request of the complainant, the OPs checked the electricity meter on dated 02-03-2021 and found that the said meter reading was declared as figure abnormal/defective (Annexure C-4). The complainant was also informed to install new meter and thus on 07- 03-2021, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.1600/- vide Receipt No.108, dated 07-03-2021 to the office of OPS (Annexure C-5). However, thereafter, the OPs again raised electricity bill to the tune of Rs.5,22,717/- for the month of March 2021 which was payable upto 13-04-2021 (Annexure C-6). The meter reader/s of the OPs was/were doing his/their job negligently whereby the electricity bill of the complainant was being raised without noting down any proper meter reading in the official register/ record and when the complainant approached the OPs for rectification of the exaggerated bill of the month Jan 2021 and March 2021, it was found by the OPs that the said meter reading was declared as figure abnormal/defective (Annexure C-4) and inspite of that, the OPs brought misfortune for the complainant thereby raising such defective, false and wrong electricity bills of many lakhs. Now the complainant is being forced by the OPs to deposit the said defective, false and wrong electricity bills or else the electricity connection will be disconnected and criminal action will be taken against the complainant. The complainant is having small house comprising of only 3 room-set and tiny kitchen and bathroom and consuming electricity in a moderate way as is evident vide Annexure C-1 and C-2. The complainant has apprised these facts in detail to the OPs time and again but the OPs have turned their ears deaf to the genuine requests of the complainant in toto. The said act and conduct of the OPs amount to deficiency in providing service and adoption of unfair trade practice, this consumer complaint has been filed by the complainant.
4.           Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed written version and raised preliminary objections with regard to maintainability, not come with clean hands and suppressed the material facts, no locus standi and no cause of action etc.  On merits, it has been stated that the complainant is in huge arrears of electricity charges. The bills mentioned by the complainant are issued, as the meter reading was not visible and on the basis of report of the meter reader D- Code was entered in the account of the complainant and on the basis of that, the bills were issued on average basis to the complainant, which fact was very well in the knowledge of the complainant but the complainant intentionally and willfully failed to move any application for checking or replacement of his meter. The official of the OPs checked the meter of the complainant on 02.03.2021 and made his report dated 02.03.2021 and after that the complainant was asked to deposit the fee and complainant deposited the same on 07.03.2021. Thereafter the MCO was entered in the account of complainant vide MCO No. 24/728 and the official of the OPs checked the electricity meter of the complainant vide LL-1 Book No. 9891, Sr. No. 10 dated 13.4.2021 on the basis of MCO report and removed the said meter with new electricity meter. The official of the OP prepared a LL-1 report - Meter checked & Pack in the presence of Shri Harpreet Singh (representative of complainant) vide MCO No.24/728 dated 22.03.2021. Meter reading is not visible. Meter send to Lab for formal reading & internal examination & genuineness of M & T seal. The LL-1 report was duly signed by the checking party as well as Harpreet Singh Sandhu (representative of complainant) and the copy of the report was supplied to Harpreet Singh at the spot. The bill of March, 2021 amounting to Rs.5,22,717/- was charged as generated by the computer and as per the order of this Commission the complainant has deposited Rs.80,885/- vide receipt No. 6 dated 22.04.2021 and the same were generated by the computer in the account of the complainant. The meter of the complainant was checked in M & T Lab on 08.03.2022 by the constituted committee as per O/O No. 116/RG/-2/meter dated 02.02.2022 and during checking, it observed that i) Meter cover opened for examination, 2) Meter reading through data is 58778 KWM, 3) No malpractice is observed. As per the report of M & T Lab, the units of the complainant were retrieved as 58778. Thereafter again the account of the complainant was overhauled by the concerned official and the OPs adjusted Rs.2,68,217/- SOP, Rs. 29,122/- towards FSA, Rs.7869/- of ED, Rs.10984/- as MCT and Rs.122433 towards surcharge and the complainant is liable to pay Rs.1,03,878/-, after deducting the sundry amount from the bill dated 08.02.2022. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by the answering OPs and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with costs.
5.           Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of the complainant as Annexure CW1/A, alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 to C-6 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs tendered affidavit of Manoj Kumar, Commercial Assistant, Present posted Sub Division UHBVN, Babyal, Ambala Cantt as Annexure OP-A, alongwith documents Annexure OP-1 to OP-8 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.
6.           We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the case file.
7.           Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that by raising excessive bills in respect of the meter in question, despite the fact that the electricity consumer against the meter in question was too low and thereafter not redressing the grievance of the complainant, it amounts to deficiency in providing service and indulgence into unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. 
8.           On the contrary, the learned counsel for the OPs while reiterating the objections raised in their written version submitted that correct bill against the electricity consumed was sent to the complainant and even the meter in question was also got checked from the laboratory where it was found OK, as such, the OPs cannot be held liable for deficiency in service or guilty of adoption of unfair trade practice if they have raised the correct bill amount strictly as per rules and regulations.
9.           Since, neither installation of the meter in question in the premises of the complainant by the OPs nor the bills in question raised by them which are challenged in this complaint, are in dispute, as such, the only moot question which falls for consideration in this case is, as to whether, the complainant has been able to prove his case or not. It may be stated here that to prove that the meter in question was defective, as a result of which it was showing excessive consumption of electricity, the complainant was required to convince this Commission by placing on record some cogent and convincing evidence, which he miserably failed to do so. On the other hand, it is coming out from the record that the OPs checked the meter of the complainant vide LL-1 Book No. 9891, Sr. No. 10 dated 13.4.2021, Annexure OP-3.  The official of the OPs prepared a LL-1 report - Meter checked & Pack in the presence of Shri Harpreet Singh (representative of complainant ) vide MCO No. 24/728 dated 22.03.2021 and opined that Meter reading is not visible. Meter send to Lab for formal reading & internal examination & genuineness of M & T seal. Thereafter, the meter of the complainant was checked in M & T Lab on 08.03.2022 (Annexure OP-4) by the constituted committee as per O/O No. 116/RG/-2/meter dated 02.02.2022 and during checking, it was observed that i) Meter cover opened for examination, 2) Meter reading through data is 58778 KWM, 3) No malpractice is observed. As per the report of M & T Lab, the units of the complainant were retrieved as 58778. Thus, the OPs by placing on record have proved their case that the meter in question was not found defective. However, in para no.13 of the written version, the OPs have stated that the account of the complainant was overhauled by the concerned official and the OPs adjusted Rs.2,68,217/- SOP, Rs.29,122/- towards FSA, Rs. 7869/- of ED, Rs. 10984/- as MCT and Rs.122433/- towards surcharge and the complainant is liable to pay Rs.1,03,878/-. If this is so, we cannot hold the OPs deficient in any manner.
10.           For the reasons recorded above, this complaint stands dismissed with no order as to cost. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties concerned as per rules.  File be annexed and consigned to the record room.

Announced:- 10.11.2023