Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 478
Instituted on : 17.08.2021
Decided on : 26.07.2024
Tajinder Kumar age 58 years s/o Late Sh. SukhDayal R/o Laxmi Apartment Plot/Flat No.790/16, Malabar Guest House, Rohtak.
……….………….Complainant.
Vs.
Uttar Haryana BijliVitran Nigam Ltd.(UHBVNL) through SDO Sub-Division No.2, R-42, Near old ITI Flyover, Rohtak.
...........……Respondent/opposite party.
COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Sh.G.K.Lalit, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Vishal Bhatia, Advocate for the opposite party.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that he is consumer of respondent and is having domestic electricity connection bearing no.8075079061. Initially the complainant was permanent resident of No.790/16, Malabar Guest House Rohtak. The complainant being owner of the flat/plot has received an electricity bill bearing no.SB21F25006351NV2346 dated 25.06.2021 for an amount of Rs.233514/- including NET sundry charges. The complainant deposited Rs.134000/- including sundry charges by cash at the office of opposite party on dated 09.08.2021 and remaining balance amount rs.99514/- kept pending towards complainant and respondent had asked the complainant to pay the same as soon as possible. The complainant made repeated requests to the opposite party to give time and details of previous bills including sundry charges which was imposed upon the complainant but the opposite party flatly refused to take the application for taking the details of previous bills, included NET sundry charges and threatened the complainant to implicate in many false cases. The complainant is entitled to get his deposited amount of Rs.134000/- alongwith interest and he is ready to pay the applicable bill as early as possible when final detail related to above said bill will be provided but the respondent is not entitled to any surcharge after 04.08.2021 when the complainant firstly applied for getting details of previous bills to the opposite parties. The act and conduct of opposite party is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to give the details of previous bills if any and particulars of sundry charges issued to the complainant. The impugned bill may kindly be declared as null and void including sundry charges too and to pay a sum of Rs.25000/- on account of mental agony & harassment and Rs.22000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint,notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in preliminary objections of its reply has submitted that reference meter was installed at the site of Luxmi apartment. Reading of above apartment was noted on 17.11.2020. Difference between the consumer meter and the reference meter was charged as per Nigam instructions. The total difference of units between both meter was noted which was 115225 units. On merits it is submitted that the electricity bill amounting to Rs.233514/- was raised against the consumer no.8075079061. The complainant deposited part payment of electricity bill and the rest amount is chargeable from the complainant. The electricity bill has been raised according to the norms of the Nigam and that has also been informed to the complainant. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be matter of record and legal. Opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. Ld. counsel for complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C7 and closed his evidence on dated 16.01.2023. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, and closed his evidence on 04.07.2024.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. The main contention of the complainant is that wrong and excessive bill has been issued by the opposite party. At the time of arguments, the respondent placed on record 3 documents Annexure JNA to Annexure JNC. As per Annexure JNA the concerned JE wrote a letter to SDO Sub Division no.2 Rohtak and through this letter it has been submitted that there is some difference in consumption recorded in the meters installed at the consumer end(including complainant) and HT meter installed at transformer at the premises of Laxmi Apartments 790/16, Hari Nagar, Rohtak. Through this letter it has been further submitted that the difference of consumption be charged from the 4 consumers i.e. Kailash Chander, Dinesh Kumar, Yogh Raj and Tejinder Kumar i.e. present complainant. We have minutely perused the document Annexure-JNB the sundry report, which has been prepared by the concerned JE having 2 pages. The contents of this Annexure-JNB i.e. sundry report is as under :-
“The reading/energy difference between reference meter and individual meter under group housing society(Laxmi Apartments) is hereby charged as per sales circular No.U-07/2013 with intimation dated 9th January 2013 after receiving the detail of reading in units of reference meter and new meter from concerned JE-area-incharge on dated 17.11.2020. As per JE-area–incharge report dated 17.11.2020”. In this report the reading in the reference meter recorded on dated 17.11.2020 was mentioned as 98796 and after applying multiply factor two, it comes to 197592 and the total number of individual meters having domestic supply in group housing society was 11. The total reading of individual meters of Group housing society comes to 82367 units on dated 17.11.2020 so there is difference of 115227 units(197592-82367). So the respondent officials charged the electricity charges of above mentioned units from the four consumers namely Kailash, Tejinder Singh, Raj Singh and Yog Raj. In this way an amount of Rs.828461/- has been divided in 4 parts and charged from them. The respondent also placed on record reading of 11 consumers in application ‘Annexure-JNC’ and after considering these documents the CA prepared a sundry report and issued the bills. As per our opinion the respondent officials firstly failed to place on record reading of reference meter and ‘detail of old and new reading’ of 11 meters. The department itself observed that there was difference in reference meter and consumer meter. It is not clarified that why there was difference in reference meter reading and domestic supply meters. Moreover, there are chances that there would be defect in the reference meter and it cannot be said that there was defect in all the 11 meters. If the electricity energy was being stolen by someone, in that case the group housing society is not liable to pay the difference amount. It is also observed that 11 individual meters have been installed in 11 premises then why the difference of reference meter and domestic electricity meters of the group housing society is imposed upon these 4 consumers. Moreover it has been submitted by the complainant that there is no group housing society in existence but there are 11 individual independent flats. So it cannot be stated that group housing society owners or shareholders will pay the difference of electricity energy charges. It is the prime duty of the respondent officials that they should check the electricity meter of all the 11 consumers from the authorised laboratory to prove the fact that there was any defect in the alleged meters but neither the reference meter nor the meters of the consumers were checked in the laboratory. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and opposite parties are liable to waive off the bill imposed upon the complainant.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to waive off the sundry charged imposed upon the complainant vide bill dated 25.06.2021 and to refund the amount of Rs.134000/-(Rupees one lac thirty four thousand only) deposited by the complainant against the alleged bill alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of deposit till its realisation to the complainant. Opposite party is also directed to pay the amount of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. All the awarded amount shall be adjusted in the future bills of the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
26.07.2024.
........................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
TriptiPannu, Member.
……………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member
