Haryana

Karnal

451/2013e

Suresh Kumar S/o Hem raj - Complainant(s)

Versus

Uttar Haryana Bijle Vitran Nigam Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Bal Kishan

14 Mar 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

                                                               Complaint No.451 of 2013

                                                               Date of instt.: 12.11.2013

                                                               Date of decision:14.03.2017

 

Suresh Kumar son of Shri Hem Raj resident of village Kalri Jagir Tehsil and District Karnal.

 

                                                                              ……..Complainant.

                                      Vs.

Sub Divisional Officer, UHBVN Ltd. Garhi Birbal, Tehsil Indri, District Karnal.

 

                                                                                      ………… Opposite Party.

 

                     Complaint u/s 12  of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before                   Sh.K.C.Sharma……….President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

Present:-       Sh. Rajbir Sharma Advocate for the complainant.

                    Sh. Sanjeev Kamboj Advocate for the Opposite party

                  

 ORDER:

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer protection Act 1986, on the averments that he was having electric connection bearing account no.K-20 for running tubewell for irrigating his agricultural land. He was provided connection from transformer of 6KV installed in his filed. The load of his connection was 5HP, but he got the same extended to 10HP, vide application no.15852 AP Ext. and deposited an amount of Rs.14,250/- for that purpose. However, no transformer was provided after extension of the load, but electricity bill of 10HP connection was being charged from him since 22.5.2012. About two months ago, transformer had burnt. He made complaint and requested for change of the transformer, but the transformer was not changed despite repeated requests, due to which he suffered loss of Rs.1,00,000/- as he could not irrigate his crop. Such act and conduct on the part of the opposite party amounted to deficiency in service, which caused him mental pain and agony as well as physical harassment.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the opposite party, who appeared and filed written statement disputing the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that the complainant has no locus standi and cause of action to file the complaint; that the complainant has not approached this forum with clean hands; that the complaint is an abuse of process of law and that this forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaint.

                   On merits, it has been submitted that the matter regarding change of transformer of the complainant was under progress and that the complainant had not suffered any loss due to any fault of the Nigam as burning of the transformer was beyond the control of the opposite party.

3.                In evidence of the complainant, his affidavit EX.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 and C2 have been tendered.

4.                On the other hand, in evidence of the opposite party, affidavit of Daljit Singh Verma Sub Divisional Officer Ex.OW1/A and document Ex.O1 have been tendered.

5.                We have appraised the evidence on record, the material circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

6.                There is no dispute between the parties that the complainant was having electricity connection of 5HP and lateron he got extended the same to 10 HP and deposited an amount of Rs.14,250/- for that purpose. It is also not in dispute that the connection was provided to the complainant from the transformer of 6KV. As per allegations of the complainant, new transformer was not installed even after extension of the load to 10 HP, but the opposite party charged from him in respect of the load of 10HP.

7.                The copy of the receipt Ex.C1 shows that the complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.14,250/- on 22.5.2012. Till filing of the complaint new transformer for running the load of 10HP was not installed by the opposite party. Learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that load of 10BHP could be run even from the transformer of the 6KV, but he has not produced any authentic proof, which may show that load of 10BHP can be run from the transformer of 6KV, therefore, his arguments cannot be accepted. However, from the bill, the copy of which is Ex.C2  it is clear that the opposite party charged the bill in respect of the load of 10BHP without installing new transformer to run such load. In this way there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, as the complainant was illegally charged for 10BHP load without installing the new transformer. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to get refund/adjusted the excess amount paid by him till installation of the new transformer which could be sufficient for running 10BHP load.

8.                As a sequel to the foregoing discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the opposite party to refund/adjust the excess amount paid by the complainant till installation of the new transformer alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of deposit till its adjustment/refund. We further direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.3300/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him and for the litigation expenses. This order shall be complied within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated: 14.03.2017

                                                                                      (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                                         President,

                                                                             District Consumer Disputes

                                                                             Redressal Forum, Karnal.

                             (Anil Sharma)

                               Member