Haryana

Ambala

CC/173/2021

Prem Bahl - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

Sanjeet Singh

18 Aug 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

 

                                                          Complaint case no.         :    173 of 2021

                                                          Date of Institution           :     28.04.2021

                                                          Date of decision    :     18.08.2022.

Prem Bahl aged about 75 years, wife of Sh. Balbir Kumar Bahl, resident of H.No.925, Sector 7, Urban Estate, Ambala City.                                           

                                                                                      ……. Complainant.

                                      Versus                 

1. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., through Executive Engineer, Operation Division UHBVN, Ambala City, Jasmeet Nagar, Behind Royal Palace, Near Vita Milk Plant, Kalka Chowk, Ambala City.
2. SDO Operation, Sub-Division UHBVN, Model Town, Ambala City.                 

                                                                             ….…. Opposite Parties.

 

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member,

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.         

                            

Present:       Sh. Saravjeet Singh, Advocate, counsel for the Complainant.

                     Sh. B.S. Behgal, Advocate, counsel for the OPs.

 

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President

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 recall the bill dated 14.12.2020 and to overhaul the account of the complainant from 14.12.2020 to 26.02.2021 on the basis of consumption recorded by the meter of the complainant during the corresponding period of pervious year.

 

(ii)     To pay Rs.50,000/-, as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant.

(iii)    To pay Rs.25,000/- as cost of litigation.

 

          Grant any other relief which this Hon’ble Commission may deem fit.

 

2.             Brief facts of this case are that an electricity connection of domestic supply category bearing account no.1987820000 with a sanctioned load of 5 KW stood installed at the residence of the complainant at H.No.925, Sector 7, Urban Estate, Ambala City. She has regularly been paying the bills, raised by the OPs for the consumption of electricity against the said meter. On 13.02.2021, when the meter reader arrived to record the reading from the meter, he informed the complainant that the meter has gone defective as it was showing unusually high consumption of electricity i.e. 5118 units within a span of last two months i.e. from 14.12.2020 to 13.02.2021. Resultantly, the complainant moved an application before OP No.2 for changing the defective meter with a new one and also requested him to rectify the defective bill. On the directions of OP No.2, the complainant challenged the accuracy of the meter and deposited the requisite fee for checking of accuracy of the said meter in M&T Lab. On 26.02.2021, the defective meter was removed by the officials of OP No.2 and new meter was installed in its place. The said defective meter showed the reading at 97214.8 units on the date of its removal, which exhibited the consumption of 5723.8 units within a span of 13 days as the meter reading on 13.02.2021, when the meter reader arrived, was 91491 units. After the defective meter was changed with the new meter, the complainant again requested OP No.2 to overhaul the account for the period from 14.12.2020 to 26.02.2021, on the basis of consumption made by her during the corresponding period of previous year. OP No.2 assured the complainant that he would do the needful, after the defective meter is checked by M&T Lab, Dhulkot, Ambala City. On 09.03.2021, the defective meter was got checked from M&T Lab by OP No.2 but the report thereof  has not been supplied to the complainant till date. The meter installed in the place of defective meter was also not a new meter but an old one and the same exhibited the reading of 29322 units on the date of installation at the site of the complainant.  On 14.04.2021, the meter reader again arrived to record the reading and the meter exhibited the reading at 29549 units i.e. the consumption of 227 units from 26.02.2021 to 14.04.2021. The said consumption was accurate and syncs with the previous consumption patterns of electricity by the complainant. But to the utter dismay of the complainant, OP No.2 served the complainant with an unusually high and fictitious bill dated 14.04.2021 whereby she was called upon to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,268/- for the consumption of 12870.90 units of electricity. Even the figure of 12870.90 units is fictitious and can't be arrived at even if the consumption recorded by defective meter was taken into account. After the receipt of the said bill dated 14.04.2021, complainant again met OP No.2 and requested to overhaul the account for the defective period but he flatly refused to accept her request by saying that during checking in M&T Lab, the meter has been found to be OK. Complainant also requested the OP No.2 to supply the copy of report of M&T Lab but he flatly refused to give the same. By raising the exaggerated bill in respect of the defective meter and at the same time by not handing over the report of M & T Lab, the OPs have committed deficiency in service and also adopted unfair trade practice. Hence, the present complaint.
3.           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 and locus standi etc. On merits, while admitting factual matrix of the case, with regard to installation of electricity meter in the house of the complainant, it has been stated that  at the time of checking the meter of the complainant vide LL-1 Book No.9812 Sr. No.50 dated 26.2.2021,  the connected load was found 6.606 KW against sanctioned load of 5 KW. The complainant had moved a complaint on 17.02.2021 for checking of the meter installed in her premises.  As such, the Officials of the OPs visited the premises of the complainant and checked the meter and found that it was working properly and gave meter status as Meter blinking within the limit and made report dated 18.02.2021 in that regard. However, still the complainant challenged the meter and requested to get it checked from factory at Dhulkot, as a result of which, OP No.2 asked her to deposit the necessary fee for challenging the meter. Resultantly, the meter was removed and packed in the card board box with tape and sent to the M&T Lab for checking its accuracy & external examination. On  09.03.2021, the meter of the complainant was checked in M & T Lab in her presence and  it was observed that firm seal: 4 No. lead seals AVON on each lend found intact. Observation: (1) Accuracy of the meter checked on the test bench and found working within permissible limit. (2) Creep test also carried out and found in order, (3) During internal examination, no tempering found within the meter. Report of M & T, Lab was supplied to the complainant. OPs raised the bill as per the electricity consumed by the complainant. The OPs thus rightly raised the bill dated 14.4.2021 for a sum of Rs.1,01,668/- without surcharge and Rs.1,04,622/- with surcharge for consumption of 12870.90 units of electricity and the complainant is liable to pay the same. As per order of this Commission the complainant has deposited Rs.40,107/- i.e. 40% of the total amount vide receipt No. 000338 dated 28.5.2021. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by the answering OPs and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with costs.
4.           Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of complainant as Annexure C-X alongwith documents Annexure C-1 to C-8 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs tendered affidavit of Sh. Harish Kumar Goyal, SDO UHBVNL, Model Town, Ambala City as Annexure OP-1/A alongwith documents Annexure OP-1 to OP-7 and closed the evidence on behalf of the OPs.
5.           We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the case file.
6.           Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that because the meter in question was defective as a result of which it jumped and showed excessive consumption of units for the period mentioned above, rather than the actual electricity consumer by the complainant as such, the OPs were liable to get it property checked and withdraw the exaggerated bill and on the other hand should have raised the bills, keeping in view the earlier bills of the previous year viz. consumption of electricity by the complainant, but they failed to do so, which has caused a lot of mental agony and harassment to her.
7.           On the contrary, the learned counsel for the OPs has submitted that since the OPs have got the meter in question checked from the M & T Lab, Dhulkot and that too in the presence of the complainant, which was found to be OK, as such, the OPs were right in raising bill dated 14.4.2021 for a sum of Rs.1,01,668/- without surcharge and Rs.1,04,622/- with surcharge for consumption of 12870.90 units of electricity, out of which, as per order of this Commission the complainant has already deposited Rs.40,107/- i.e. 40% of the total amount vide receipt No. 000338 dated 28.05.2021.
8.           The moot question which falls for consideration in the present case is, as to whether, the meter in question installed at the premises of the complainant was defective, as a result  whereof, it showed  excessive consumption electricity within a span of two months i.e. from 14.12.2020 to 13.02.2021 or not? It may be stated here that in the Checking Report of Meter dated 09.03.2021, Annexure OP-3 issued by the Expert Panel of Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Office of Assistant Engineer, Meter Testing Laboratory, Dhulkot, it is mentioned as under:-

 

1. Accuracy of the meter checked on test bench and found working within permissible limit
2. Creep test also carried and found in order
3. During external examination, no tempering found inside the meter

 

9.           It is further significant to add here that the above-said checking of the meter in question was done in the presence of the complainant, which has been signed by Customer/User, Vigilance Staff, SDO/JE/AFM, JE/EA M & T Lab and SDO M & T Lab, UHBVN, Dhulkot. Annexure OP-3 further shows that a very detailed report has been made after checking the meter in question by the said Officers/Officials and that too in the present of the  customer/user, wherein it has been opined that  the said meter is not defective and is working within the permissible limits. Furthermore, we did not find anything on this report that any protest has been raised by the customer/user while signing the said report. At the same time, not even a single evidence contrary to Checking Report of Meter dated 09.03.2021, Annexure OP-3 has been placed on record by the complainant.
10.           Thus under above circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that once it has been proved on record that the meter in question installed in the premises of the complainant was not defective, as such, the bills raised by the OPs, in respect of consumption of electricity for the period in dispute, cannot be held to be erroneous or exaggerated and the complainant cannot wriggle out of making payment for the same. 
11.           In view of peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, it is held that because the complainant has failed to prove her case, as such, no relief can be given to her. Resultantly, this complaint stands dismissed with no order as to cost. 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: 18.08.2022.

 

 

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

              Member                                  Member             President