Haryana

Ambala

CC/384/2017

Usha Rani - Complainant(s)

Versus

UHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

Pawan Kumar GPA

10 Sep 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

                                                           Complaint No.:384 of 2017.

                                                           Date of Instt.: 10.11.2017.

                                                           Date of Decision: 10.09.2018.

 

Usha Rani widow of late Pyare Lal r/o H.No.552 R.A.Bazar, Ambala Cantt, through G.P.A. Pawan Kumar s/o Pyare Lal r/o H.No.552, R.A. Bazar, Ambala Cantt. District Ambala (Haryana).

 

                                                                             …Complainant.

                             Versus

 

1.Uttar Hayana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (UHBVN) through SDO OP Sub Division, Babyal Ambala Cantt. District Ambala.

2.Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (UHBVN) through Superintendent Engineer, Operation Circle, Ambala City.

3.Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (UHBVN) Shakti Bhawan, Sector-6, Panchkiula through its Chairman/Managing Director.

 

                                                                             …Opposite Party.

 

             Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

 

CORAM:        SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.                                    

 

Present:                Sh. Pawan Kumar,GPA for the complainant.

                             Sh. Chandeep Singh Bindra, counsel for the OPs.

 

ORDER:

 

                             In brief, case of the complainant is that Usha Rani widow of late Pyare Lal had obtained an electricity domestic connection with sanctioned load of 0.2 KW bearing account No.YD-20-2544 from OPs and has been making the electricity bills regularly.  The meter of the complainant remained out of order since long and she had moved an application to OP No.1 regarding non-working of meter being in dead condition but it did not yield anything rather the complainant was directed to pay the average bill. The complainant received an electricity bill dated 12.09.2017 with amount of Rs.35332/- alongwith sundry charges of Rs.28852.69/-. The bill for consumed units  was Rs.6479.22/-  but the official of the Op No.1 refused to deposit the same and then the complainant had deposited Rs.12000/- as one third of the whole amount. The sundry charges of Rs.28852.69/- have been wrongly mentioned in the bill. OP No.1 issued notice memo No.190 dated 21.04.2017 in which the audit party has pointed out that Rs.28915/- overhauled during 5/13 to 5/15  vide HM No.142 dated 12.12.2016. The complainant requested OP No.1 to correct the same but to no avail.  The act and conduct of the OPs clearly amounts to deficiency in service on their part. In evidence, the complainant has tendered affidavit Annexure CA and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C6.

2.                          On notice OPs appeared and filed their joint reply wherein preliminary objections such as cause of action, maintainability and locus standi have been taken. The meter of the complainant was not functioning properly and on the basis of report of meter reader a D-code in this regard is entered in the account of the complainant and on the basis of that bills on average basis i.e. 100 units only were issued and OPs at their own checked the electricity meter vide LL-1 Book No.116 Sr.No.31 dated 14.01.2015 on the basis of YMPL report and removed the said meter with new electricity meter. The complainant had signed the checking report. The account of the complainant was overhauled from May, 2013 to March, 2015 vide HM No.142 dated 12.12.2016 and in the said overhauling the account of Rs.28915/- came out to be paid by the complainant on account of electricity consumed on average basis and regarding this a notice No.190 dated 21.04.2017 was issued to the complainant but when the complainant neither made the payment thereof nor raised any objections, therefore, the said amount was added in the bill dated 12.09.2017. The complainant has never approached the OP No.1 to solve the problem and he is liable to make the payment as demanded by them.  Other contentions made in the complaint have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. In evidence, the OPs have tendered affidavit Annexure RA and documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R4.

3.                          We have heard learned counsel for the parties besides going through the evidence and documents on the file carefully.

4.                          The complainant has challenged bill bearing No.01432 dated 12.09.2017 with the amount of Rs.35232/- alongwith sundry charges Rs.28852.69. Complainant has approached to the OPs for rectification of the bill and charged the amount of Rs.6469.22/-and sundry charges have been wrongly shown in this bill. The OPs have placed on record the consumption data for the period from 2013 to 2016. On the perusal of the above said data it is clear that the meter of the complainant has not shown any consumption and Dcode has been shown in the meter from the period February 2013 to February 2015 and OP have overhauled the account of the complainant on the basis of new meter reading and meter was changed on 16.01.2015 which was effected on 21.02.2015 and consumption of the new meter shown from period 15.04.2015 to 15.04.2016 on the basis one year consumption and overhaul the account of the complainant and send the notice to the complainant on 21.04.2017 and amount has been shown in the bill dated 12.09.2017 as per Annexure C6.  It is clear from the consumption data that the meter of the complainant shown Dcode which shows that no consumption has been recorded in the meter whenever the complainant has consumed the electricity during the Dcode period he cannot escape from her liability to pay the overhaul amount as per Annexure R1 and OPs have rightly sent the bill Annexure C6 on the basis of actual consumption as mentioned above.

5.                          In view of the above discussion, this Forum has concluded that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and accordingly present complaint is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned, as per rules. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

 

 

ANNOUNCED ON: 10.09.2018                                              

                                   

 

 

                        (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)                            (D.N. ARORA)

                         MEMBER                                                        PRESIDENT