Haryana

Kurukshetra

CC/315/2020

Lovekesh Manchhal S/o D.C. Machhal - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

B.R.Bharti

13 Jan 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL  COMMISSION, KURUKSHETRA.

                                                     Complaint Case No.315 of 2020

                                                     Date of institution: 11.09.2020

                                                     Date of decision:13.01.2022

                         

Lovkesh Machhal son of Sh.D.C.Machhal, PNB Colony, Salarpur Road, Kurukshetra.                                     …Complainant.

                        Versus

1.UHBVNL, through its Managing Director, Plot No.C-16, Vidyut Sadan, Sector 6, Urban Estate, Panchkula.

 

2.XEN, “OP” Division No.2, UHBVNL, Sector -8,Urban Estate, Kurukshetra.

3.SDO “OP” Sub Division No.2, UHBVNL,  Sector -8, Urban Estate, Kurukshetra.

….Opposite parties.

                Complaint u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:      Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.

                Ms. Neelam, Member.

                Sh.  Issam Singh Sagwal, Member.

       

Present:     Sh.B.R.Bharti Advocate for the complainant.

                Sh.O.P.Ladwa Advocate for the Ops.

ORDER

                This is a complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by complainant Lovkesh Machhal  against  UHBVNL  etc. the opposite parties.

2.            It is stated in the complaint that the complainant is using the electricity   supply for domestic purpose vide electricity connection account No.7312380000 having sanctioned load of 5 KW.  The complainant has been making the payment of electricity dues regularly and he is no where defaulter at any stage.  The complainant has also shown a table for the last one year showing average consumption from  342 to 810 units.  It is further submitted that in the month of October 2019 the OP Nigam raised the inflated electricity bill amounting to Rs.37,644/- showing the electricity consumption of 4739 units.  The complainant was shocked after receiving the  said bill and he lodged a online complaint to the OP No.3 on 30.10.2019 stating that the read shown is on the higher side.  The OP No.3 has not paid any heeds towards the request of the complainant and pressurized to make the full payment.  The OP No.3 assured the complainant that the electricity meter would be changed and asked to deposit Rs.10,000/- which was deposited by the complainant vide receipt  No.97200006996 dated 19.11.2019.The defective meter of the complainant was changed in December 2019 but the electricity bill was  issued in
February 2020  for Rs.45,407.04P  showing the units consumer 3481.8P ( showing  reading of new meter 371+ 3852.08P of old meter) for the period of December, January and  February including the readings of old and new meters which proved that the OP No.3 has not  corrected the bill as assured by him.  The defective meter of the complainant was also got checked from the3 Nigam Laboratory on 28.2.2020  as per following report:

        Status of the Seals.

        Firm seals                  Two Nos.            Intact.

        N &T Seals                 Two nos.            Intact.

        Paper Seals/Riverts.

Observations:

i)      Accuracy of meter cannot be checked due to block burnt and display defective.

ii)      Reading of meter cannot be retrieved.

iii)     No tampering observed with metering system.

 

                It is further submitted that after  receipt of the above said M& T Lab record ,it is clear that the  block of the meter was burnt and there was no tampering with the meter as well as    reading of the meter cannot be retrieved as such the OP No.3 has raised the electricity bill for the month of October 2019  for Rs.37444/- on the basis of inflated/fake consumption whereas the reading on the meter was not visible. Thus the bill for the month of October 2019 to February 2020 are illegal and void and not sustainable.  By  adding such huge amount the bill for the month o f April 2020 has been issued  for Rs.65,915.12P and likewise for the month of
August it has been issued for Rs.58,344/- ( 807.8 units).   It is further submitted that as per  rule 6.9 of Sale Circular W-25/2016 and other institutions issued by the Nigam time to time where the meter is found defective/dead stop/burnt in such cases the account of the consumer is to be overhauled by taking consumption of corresponding period or six accurate months or three months but in the instant case the Nigam has not done so, which amounts to deficiency in services on the part of the Ops. Thus, the complainant has filed the present complaint alleging deficiency in services on the part of the Ops and prayed that Ops be directed not to recover the arrear which has been illegally added and to correct the illegally raised bills of the complainant alongwith compensation for the mental harassment caused to the complainant.

3.             Upon notice Ops appeared and filed written statement disputing the claim of the complainant. It is submitted that in the month of October 2019, the electricity consumption was 4739 units which was as per the  meter reading and was OK and the bill was made as per the actual consumption  i.e. 4739 units. There is no any defect in the calculation as it was calculated as per the meter reading. It is mentioned that in the bill of Feb. 2019 the new reading was shown “0”  dated 27.12.2019 and the bill was calculated from 14.10.2019 to 27.12.2019 for a period of 74 days of 3110.8 units as per the computer system, rather the Ops are going to correct the same in the corresponding period as per instruction of the Nigam and the complainant has already moved an application to the Nigam for the correction of the same. The said application is still pending for the correction of the bill so the complainant is not entitled to  file the present complaint. All other allegations made in the complaint have been denied specifically and it was submitted that there is no deficiency in services on the part of the Ops and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

4.             The complainant in support of his case has filed his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-16 and closed his evidence.

5.             On the other hand, the learned counsel for the  Ops has filed affidavit Ex.RW1/A and tendered documents Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-4 and closed the evidence of the Ops.

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

7.             The learned counsel for the complainant while reiterating the averments made in the complaint has argued that complainant is using the electricity   supply for domestic purpose vide electricity connection account No.7312380000 having sanctioned load of 5 KW.  The complainant has been making the payment of electricity dues regularly and he is no where defaulter at any stage.  The complainant has also shown a table for the last one year showing average consumption from 342 to 810 units. 

                 It is argued that remaining disputed bills of the complainant have been corrected  but thee bill Ex.R-1 issued for the period  13.08.2019 to 14.10.2019 has been also wrongly issued   and the units consumed during this period has been shown for 4739 units. It is also argued that in the said bill meter status has been shown as “F” which means faulty and the units consumed has been wrongly shown and the complainant is not liable to pay for the said units.

                        It is further submitted that as per rule 6.9 of Sale Circular W-25/2016 and other institutions issued by the Nigam time to time where the meter is found defective/dead stop/burnt in such cases the account of the consumer is to be overhauled by taking consumption of corresponding period or six accurate months or three months but in the instant case the Nigam has not done so, which amounts to deficiency in services on the part of the Ops.

8.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the Ops while reiterating the submissions made in the written statement has argued that submitted that in the month of October 2019, the electricity consumption was 4739 units which was as per the  meter reading and was OK and the bill was made as per the actual consumption  i.e. 4739 units. There is no any defect in the calculation as it was calculated as per the meter reading. It is mentioned that in the bill of Feb. 2019 the new reading was shown “0” dated 27.12.2019 and the bill was calculated from 14.10.2019 to 27.12.2019 for a period of 74 days of 3110.8 units as per the computer system, rather the Ops are going to correct the same in the corresponding period as per instruction of the Nigam and the complainant has already moved an application to the Nigam for the correction of the same. The said application is still pending for the correction of the bill so the complainant is not entitled to  any relief.

9.             Admittedly the perusal of the bill for the months of August to October 2019 shows that this bill has been issued for 4739 units and the status of the Meter has been shown as “F” and the said bill Ex.R-1 appears to be issued illegally showing the consumption on the higher side.  Perusal of the M& T Laboratory shows   “Accuracy of meter cannot be checked due to block burnt and display defective.      Reading of meter cannot be retrieved. No tampering observed with metering system.”

                          After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the Ex.C-16 instruction No.6.9   Procedure for billing under special circumstances. As per instruction No.6.9.1 in case of defective stick/dead stop/ burnt meter, the consumer during the period of defective meter shall be billed provisionally in the following manner 

                (a) On the basis of the consumption recorded during corresponding period of previous year when the meter was functional and  was recording  units of consumption correctly.

                The disputed period in this case is from August to September 2019 for a period of three months for which bill Ex.R-1 has been issued. In such circumstances, ends of justice would fully met if the complainant is charged with the consumption of August 2018 to October 2018 instead of consumption allegedly shown in the bills Ex.R-1 for the August to September 2018 but the Ops kept adding the said illegal amount in the bills of the complainant which amounts to gross deficiency in services on the part of the Ops. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to relief for correction of the bill by the Ops.

10.            In view of our above findings and observations, we accept the present complaint and direct the Ops to

i)              Withdraw the alleged illegal bill Ex.R-1 issued for the month of August to October 2019 and shall also withdraw the said amount of illegal bill which has been further added in the bills of the complainant with surcharge etc.

ii)             Over haul the account of the complainant by taking consumption of August to October 2018 instead of consumption allegedly shown in the bills for the month of August to October 2019.

iii)             Pay the sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation in lump sum to the complainant for the mental harassment caused to him and the litigation expenses.

                The Ops are further directed to make the compliance  of this order within a period of thirty days from the date of this order, failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to initiate proceedings u/s 71 of the Consumer Protection Act. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in the open Commission

Dated 13.01.2022

                                                                  President.

 

                        Member        Member.