Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 128
Instituted on : 18.02.2021
Decided on : 23.08.2022.
Dhani Ram @ Dhani Kumar age-37 yrs. Son of Sh. Ram Kumar R/o VPO Patwapur Tehsil Kalanaur, Distt. Rohtak
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam through Sub Divisional Officer, Electricity Department, Kahanoor, Distt. Rohtak.
- Xen. of Sub Division No. 1, Rohtak.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Krishan Dhull, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Ajay Gaur, Advocate for opposite party.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the complaint as per complainant are that he has an electricity connection bearing Account No. R32PKP10379L. The said connection is installed in his house and the meter is placed/tied on the pole in the street by the opposite party. Complainant is paying electricity bills regularly and was consuming 130 to 134 units per cycle in average from the date of obtaining the connection. Suddenly his electricity meter started jumping and giving exalted units 1209 reading and the opposite party no. 1 issued an electricity bill of Rs.6937/- for 1209 units. Despite poor financial condition, he has paid the said bill. Complainant’s house is having a load of 0.8 KVA and there is no heavy electric instruments being used in his house. So, it is not possible that such 1209 units could be consumed. Complainant filed a complaint on 17 November 2020 with registration No. CMPR 31000330408 for checking of electricity meter but the officials of opposite party without visiting the site, closed the complaint on the same day and remarked that meter was working properly. He also filed the complaint on 21th November 2020 with registration no.CMPR 32000331790 but no action was taken by opposite party and the complaint was closed on 11.12.2020. Thereafter complainant approached opposite party many times but his requests were ignored and remain unanswered. The act 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 withdraw aforesaid wrong and excessive bill, not to disconnect the electricity connection of complainant, reverse back the excessive bill amount charged by the department and also to pay Rs.20,000/- on account of harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant as explained in relief clause.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared but failed to file any reply despite availing sufficient opportunities and the defence of opposite parties was struck off vide order dated 20.04.2022 of this Commission.
3. Complainant led evidence in support of his case.
4. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, document Ex.CW1 to Ex.CW2 and closed his evidence on dated 07.06.2022.
5. We have heard ld. counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
6. In the present case, as per the complainant he has a domestic electricity connection and he received a bill amounting to Rs.6937/- for the month of November 2020 showing the consumed units as 1209. As per the complainant the previous history of consumer itself shows that he consumed 103 units in the bills for the the month of December 2019 & February 2020, 119 units in the month of April 2020, 134 untis in June 2020 and 110 in the bill of August 2020. Respondent officials wrongly issued the bill for the month of November 2020. He further submitted that there is mechanical defect in the meter in question and the consumed units have been shown on higher side i.e. 1209 units.. To prove this contention complainant has placed on record a document i.e. Consumer ledger as ‘Annexure-A’ at the time of arguments. A bare perusal of this documents itself shows that the complainant has consumed units 167 in the bill issued for the month of January 2021, 306 units in March, 119 in May, 134 in July 2021. It is pertinent to mention here that the meter of the complainant has been replaced by the department approximately in the month of April/May 2021. The consumption from 2019 to July 20021 itself shows that the complainant is consuming approximately 150 units bimonthly and the bill for the month of November 2020 was on higher side. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and OPs are liable to correct the bill.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties to take the average of first 3 bills of newly installed meter and on the basis of alleged consumption, to issue a fresh bill to the complainant for the month of November 2020. It is further directed that the excess amount charged from the complainant for the alleged period be adjusted in the future bills. Opposite parties are further directed to pay the amount of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.3000/-(Rupees three thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant and also to adjust the alleged amount in the future bills of the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision.
8. 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:
23.08.2022.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
…………………………….
Tripti Pannu, Member.
…………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member.
