Haryana

Ambala

CC/259/2018

Hardeep Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

02 Jul 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

 

                                                          Complaint case No.:  259 of 2018.

                                                          Date of Institution         :  16.08.2018.

                                                          Date of decision   :  02.07.2019.

 

Hardeep Singh son of Shri Gurnam Singh, resident of House No.2, Kismat Nagar, Post Office Babyal, Ambala Cantt., Age 54 years.

                                                                                       ……. Complainant.

 

1. Uttar Haryana Bijli Nigam Ltd., through its Managing Director, Shakti Bhawan, Panchkula.
2. UHBVN Ltd., Sub Division A14 Babyal, Ambala Cantt through Sub Divisional Officer.

               ..…. Opposite Parties.

         

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member.

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.                 

                            

Present:       Shri R.K. Jindal, Advocate, counsel for complainant.

Shri Sachin Goel, Advocate, counsel for OPs.

 

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 Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

1. To call back bill No.079695952569 dated 01.08.2018 and to issue a fresh bill for consumption of 626 units for the period from 29.05.2018 to 18.07.2018 and issue a bill on the average basis for the consumption of electricity for the period from 26.03.2018 to 29.05.2018.
2. To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him.
3. To pay litigation expenses.

 

Brief facts of the case are that the complainant is the permanent resident of House No.2, Kismat Nagar, Post Office Babyal, Ambala Cantt. and is retired from Indian Army as a Subedar. He is having a Domestic Electricity connection from the OPs bearing Account No.0796900000 having sanctioned load of 4.9 KV. He was getting bi-monthly bill for consumption of electricity within the range of Rs.1000/- to Rs.2,000/- and was paying the bill amount regularly. On 02.05.2018, the meter reader came to his premises and while noting down the meter reading, he noted the malfunctioning of the meter. The meter reader inquired from the complainant about the old bills, wherein, the last meter reading was shown as 18329, in the bill issued upto 02.04.2018 and on 02.05.2019, he noticed the reading as 59954, which showed the consumption of 41625 units (59954-18329=41625), which might be due to jumping of meter. He informed the OP No.2 vide letter dated 05.05.2018, upon which, on 07.05.2018 at 02:00 PM, the official of OPs visited his residence and checked the meter and found the reading as 63262. The officials of the OPs disconnected the electricity connection but inspite of that, the meter was still running and after appreciating the fault in the meter, the OP No.2 ordered for the removal of the defected meter vide job No.0796900219 and new electricity meter was installed on 29.05.2018. However, during the period of 21 days i.e. 08.05.2018 to 29.05.2018, the defective meter had shown the reading as 86808, which might be due to jumping/running fast of the meter, as it shown consumption of 23546 units (86808-63262) within a period of 21 days. Thereafter, he received a bill No.079695952569 dated 01.08.2018 for a period from 29.05.2018 to 18.07.2018 for the consumption of 626 units and in the said bill, the OPs included the consumption of 68479 units for a period from 26.03.2018 to 29.05.2018 which is highly imaginary as he has never consumed that much units of electricity during this period as he is living with a small family without having any Air Conditioner or other electrical equipments consuming heavy electricity. The complainant never consumed 68469 units as depicted in the bill in question which was sent for Rs.5,31,733/-, as such, he is not liable to pay the same. However, the complainant is ready to pay the amount of bill of 626 units for the period from 26.03.2018 to 29.05.2018. This is a clear case of deficiency in service of the OPs as the complainant had already intimated the OPs about running/jumping by the meter. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                Upon notice, OPs appeared through counsel and filed written version. However, when the case was fixed for arguments, the OPs filed an application for amendment of the written reply. Reply to the said application was filed by the complainant. The said application was allowed vide order dated 21.02.2019. As such, the OPs filed amended written version stating therein that on the request/application No.8572166820 dated 05.05.2018, MCO bearing No.0796900219 dated 08.05.2018 against Account No.0796900000 in the name of complainant has been issued by the OPs. The action was taken by the OPs on the said application and job order bearing No.0796900219 on 08.05.2018 were issued and handed over to the concerned JE Shri Tirlochan Singh alongwith MCO order. On 29.05.2018, meter in question was changed with a new meter showing reading 000000.0 by JE Shri Tirlochan Singh. Old meter has recorded and showing the reading as 86808 on 29.05.2018 and after that, electricity bill dated 01.08.2018 was issued for the month of July 2018, for the consumption period from 26.03.2018 to 29.05.2018 and 29.05.2018 to 18.07.2018 for Rs.5,47,170/- alongwith surcharge of Rs.15,437/- by the OPs office. The complainant did not deposit the said amount till due date i.e. 20.08.2018. The present complaint has been filed with a malafide intention to defraud the OPs Nigam. The electricity bill has been showing the consumption charges for 68479 units for the period from 26.03.2018 to 29.05.2018 against old meter and consumption charges for 626 units for the period from 29.05.2018 to 18.07.2018 against the new meter installed on 29.05.2018. AS per MCO dated 08.05.2018, the reading of old meter was 86808 units at the time of replacement on 29.05.2018 which is actual reading recorded by old meter. Moreover, the previous reading of old meter on 26.03.2018 was 18329 units. The complainant has levelled wrong allegations in his application dated 05.05.2018 that the old meter had jumped over and shown/recorded wrong reading. The complainant has committed a foul play in saying that the meter had jumped over, whereas, the meter was showing actual reading of 86808 units on 29.05.2018 and the complainant has accumulated deliberately the units of electricity energy in the meter. After deposit of the checking fees by the complainant i.e. vide receipt No.322 & 323 dated 04.09.2018 for Rs.50/- and Rs.90/-, the meter was sent to M&T Lab, for its checking and report dated 29.01.2019 was received by the office and as per report, meter working found as “Dead Stop”. On merits, 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.

                   The complainant by way of filing replication dated 26.02.2019, denied all the contents of the amended written version filed by the OPs.

3.                The ld. counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of complainant as Annexure CA alongwith documents Annexure C-1 to C-16 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for OPs tendered affidavits of Shri Atitosh Kumar, SDO (Operation), Sub Division, Babyal, UHBVN, Ambala Cantt as Annexure RA & RB alongwith documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R5 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.

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

5.                 Admittedly, the OPs issued a domestic electric connection bearing account No.0796900000 in favour of the complainant. The learned counsel for the complainant has argued that usually complainant was getting bi-monthly bill for consumption of electricity within the range of Rs.1000/- to Rs.2,000/- and was paying the bill amount regularly. However, on 02.05.2018, while checking the meter, the meter reader observed malfunctioning of the meter, due to sudden jumping of the meter. Accordingly, vide letter dated 05.05.2018, the complainant requested the OPs for checking of the meter. On 07.05.2018, the official of the OPs checked the meter and found the reading as 63262. The said official disconnected the electricity connection, despite of that, meter was running. As the meter was found defective, the OPs vide MCO No.0796900219 dated 29.05.2018 removed the defective meter and installed a new meter. As per report dated 29.01.2019 of M&T Lab (Annexure R-5), the meter was found “dead stop”. Since the meter was found dead stop, therefore, the OPs were to issue the bill for the period for which the meter remained dead stop, as per Sales Circular No.61/2013 which is marked as ‘A’. On 01.08.2018, the complainant received the bill showing consumption of 626 units for the period from 29.05.2018 to 18.07.2018, as per the new installed meter. However, in the said bill, the OPs included the consumption of 68479 units for the period from 26.03.2018 to 29.05.2018, when the old meter was found “stop dead”. The complainant had already paid the bill amount for the consumption of 626 units of electricity amounting Rs.3558/- vide receipt dated 04.09.2018 (Annexure C-14). Since the OPs had issued the bill in question for the consumption of 68479 units of electricity for the period from 26.03.2018 to 29.05.2018 in violation of Sales Circular No.61/2013 ‘A’, therefore, the OPs may be directed to recall the said bill to that extent and issue a fresh bill as per Sales Circular.

6.                On the contrary, the ld. counsel for the OPs has argued that on receipt of application dated 05.05.2018, the meter of the complainant was duly checked and was found defective. A new meter was installed and old defective meter was sent to M&T Lab for checking. As per the report dated 29.01.2019 of the M&T Lab, the meter was found “dead stop”, and was showing 68479 units of electricity consumption for the period from 26.03.2018 to 29.05.2018. Accordingly, the electricity bill dated 01.08.2018 was issued for the month of July 2018, for consumption of 626 units of electricity for the period w.e.f. 29.05.2018 to 18.07.2018 against the new meter installed on 29.05.2018 and for consumption of 68479 units of electricity for the period from 26.03.2018 to 29.05.2018 against the old meter. The OPs had issued the bill in question on the basis of actual consumption of electricity by the complainant, as such, question of violation of Sales Circular ‘A’ does not arise. The complaint filed by the complainant is devoid of merit and same may kindly be dismissed with cost.

7.                 From the report dated 29.01.2019 of M&T Lab (Annexure R-5), it is evident that the old meter installed at the premises of the complainant was found “dead stop”. In Clause No.1 of the Sales Circular No.61/2013 issued on dated 18.12.2013 by The Chief General Manager/Commercial, UHBVN, Panchkula, it is mentioned that in case the domestic electricity meter is found defective, sticky, dead stop, burnt, faulty or inoperative, premises locked, the electricity bill be prepared in the following manner:-

1. On the basis of the consumption recorded during the corresponding period of the previous year when the meter was functional and recording correctly.
2. In case the same is not available, then on the basis of average consumption of the past six months immediately preceding the date of the meter being found/reported defective.
3. If period of installation of meter is less than six months, then the consumer shall be billed on the basis of average consumption of the period from the date of installation of the meter to the date of the meter being found/reported defective.
4. In case no previous correct consumption date is available, owing to new connection or otherwise, the consumer shall be billed (provisionally) for the units as mentioned in the table below.

 

8.                In rebuttal to the said Sales Circular No.61/2013, nothing has been produced by the OPs. As per report of the M&T Lab, the old meter was found “dead stop”, therefore, it was incumbent upon the OPs to issue the bill with regard to consumption of electricity pertaining to old meter as per Sales Circular No.61/2013. However, the OPs have issued the bill dated 01.08.2018 for the consumption of 68479 units for the period from 26.03.2018 to 29.05.2018 when the old meter was found “dead stop”, in violation of said Sales Circular No.61/2013. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant had already paid the bill amount for the consumption of 626 units of electricity amounting Rs.3558/-, vide receipt dated 04.09.2018 (Annexure C-14), raised vide bill dated 01.08.2018. The complainant shall be liable to pay the electric consumption charges for the period from 26.03.2018 to 29.05.2018 when the old meter was “dead stop”, as per the above said Sales Circular No.61/2013. It is not the case of the OPs that the consumption of the same months of the preceding year is not available with them, therefore, they are entitled to get the electricity bill regarding the above mentioned period, as per Clause 1(a) of the said Sales Circular, without charging any surcharge, penalty etc. on account of non-payment of above-mentioned bill. Since the OPs had issued the bill dated 01.08.2018 in violation of said Circular, therefore, they are liable to compensate the complainant for mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him alongwith litigation expenses. In the case of Jagdeep Rana Vs. UHBVNL decided on 26.03.2018, the Hon’ble State Commission, Haryana has held that in case the domestic electric meter is found defective, the electricity bill be prepared as per instruction given in the Sales Circular No.61/2013.

9.                 In view of the aforesaid discussions, we allow the present complaint partly and quash the bill dated 01.08.2018 to the extent of consumption of 68479 units for the period from 26.03.2018 to 29.05.2018 and direct the OPs to issue a fresh bill as per Clause 1(a) of the Sales Circular No.61/2013, without charging any surcharge, penalty etc. on account of non-payment of above-mentioned bill. The OPs are also directed to pay amount of Rs.3,000/- as compensation alongwith Rs.2,000/- as litigation expenses. The OPs are further directed to comply with the order within the period of 30 days. 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 on :02.07.2019.

 

 

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

              Member                            Member                            President