BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.
Complaint No.:448 of 2017.
Date of Instt.: 28.12.2017.
Date of Decision: 15.11.2018.
Vinod Bhardwaj aged about 48 years son of Shri Krishan Lal resident of house No.05, Parshu Ram Nagar, Ambala City.
…Complainant.
Versus
1.Uttar Hayana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited Sector 6, Shakti Bhawan, Panchkula, through its Managing Director.
2.The Sub Divisional Officer, UHBVN, Operation Sub Division, A32 East, Ambala City.
…Opposite Parties.
Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
CORAM: SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT.
SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.
DR.SUSHMA GARG, MEMBER.
Present: Complainant in person.
Sh. Chandeep Singh Bindra, counsel for the OPs.
ORDER:
Briefly stated the facts of the present complaint are that complainant is having domestic electricity connection bearing No. 2112201UDN141506 (old) and account No.5069820008 and he has been making the consumption charges regularly. The sanctioned load was 4.5 KW and he got the same extended upto 9.5 KW on payment of necessary charges against proper receipt. After extending the load, bill for Rs.3674/- was issued to him which he had deposited and no any surcharge was mentioned therein. The OPs had issued bill dated 12.12.2017 for the month of December, 2017 having old reading 2306 and new reading 2683 (total consumed units 377) for Rs.10,191/- with date of payment 29.12.2017. In the said bill an amount of Rs.7550.33 has been shown as sundry charges. Thereafter the complainant personally visited the OP No.2 and requested to correct the same but it failed to explain the imposition of sundry charges rather asked him to deposit the bill to avoid delay payment of Rs.305/-. The act and conduct of the OPs clearly amounts to deficiency in service on their part. In evidence, the complainant tendered affidavit Annexure CA and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C20.
2. On notice OPs appeared and filed their joint reply wherein it has been submitted that the complainant got his sanctioned load extended by 5 KW in the month of August, 2017 and as per notification i.e. sale circular No.U-34/2016, all the consumers who had got their sanctioned load extended after 11.07.2016 are required to pay revised ACD and service connection charges. The complainant had paid Rs.2500/- as ACD charges at the time of taking connection and further deposited ACD Rs.2500/- at the time of extension of load. As per above said circular ACD charge were revised as Rs.750/- per KW as such a total Rs.7500/- were required to be deposited. As per the sale circular complainant was required to pay service connection charges at the rate of Rs.1000/- per KW for extended load which comes to Rs.5000/- which is still to be paid by the complainant alongwith processing fee totaling an amount of Rs.7550/-. The complaint of the complainant is false and frivolous and he is liable to make the demanded amount. Other contentions have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. In evidence, the OPs have tendered affidavit Annexure RW1/A and documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R2.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties besides going through the evidence and documents on the file carefully.
4. It is not disputed that the complainant is having domestic connection No.2112201UDN141506 (old) and account No.5069820008 with sanctioned load of 4.5 KW which was further extended upto 9.50 KW as he had applied the extension load on 04.07.2016 and also deposited the fee to the tune of Rs.5000/- vide Annexure C3 and Annexure C4 dated 02.08.2016 and 5.09.2016 whereas the application for the needful was moved on 04.09.2016. The OPs have placed on record sales circular No.U-34/2015 Annexure R1 wherein it has been mentioned that the revised General & Miscellaneous Charges as per HERC Notification No.HERC/34/2016 dated 11.07.2016 on duty to supply electricity on request, power to recover expenditure incurred in providing supply and power to require security Regulations, 2016. No doubt complainant has deposited the extended load fee on 02.08.2016 & 04.09.016 on the old rate and the OPs have not charge new rate which was enhanced on 11.07.2016 which was very much in the knowledge of OPs but it does not mean they cannot charge fee for extended load. Undisputedly, the load has been extended from 4.5 KW to 9.5 KW, therefore, the complainant was required to pay the requisite charges as per terms and conditions of the Nigam but instead of making the payment thereof, the complainant has filed the present complaint on the ground that the Nigam has demanded Rs.7550/- as sundry charges in bill dated 12.12.2017 wrongly and illegally. As per sale circular No.U-34/2016 the OPs have demanded Rs.5000/- as fee for load extension (Rs.1000/- per KW) and Rs.2500/- ACD charges and Rs.50 processing fee, therefore, the complainant is ceased to raise this plea. It is a settled principle of law that he who seeks equity must do equity with others but in the present case on one hand the complainant is enjoying the extended load but on the other hand he is trying to avoid the fee thereof which the OPs have demanded as per the terms and conditions mentioned the sale circular No.U-34/2016.
5. In view of the aforementioned discussion we are of the considered opinion that the complaint deserves dismissal. It is ordered accordingly. There is no order as to costs. Since the complainant has already deposited 40 % of the disputed amount, therefore, he is directed to deposit the remaining amount with the Ops. The Ops are also directed to charge rest of the amount by way of next bill without any interest. Stay order stands vacated. Order be complied within 30 days from the date of receiving of the copy of this order. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
ANNOUNCED ON: 15.11.2018
(PUSHPENDER KUMAR) (DR.SUSHMA GARG) (D.N. ARORA)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
