Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 506
Instituted on : 26.09.2019
Decided on : 09.07.2024
Roshni Devi age 50 years, w/o Sh.Raj Singh R/o Street No.4, Near Hanuman Mandir, Sheetal Nagar, Rohtak.
……….………….Complainant.
Vs.
Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Rohtak Sub Division No.2, Rohtak through its Sub Divisional Officer.
...........……Respondent/opposite party.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Sh.R.S.Budhwar Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Sandeep Kauahik, Advocate for the opposite party.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Present complaint has been filed by the complainant with the averments that he is having a domestic electricity connection bearing Account No.7404950000 in her house having sanctioned load of 1.5KW. Due to marriage of son of the complainant, she had to construct two rooms at 1st floor and as the complainant decided to install the Air Conditioner at 1st floor, hence she applied for extension of load from 1.5KW to 5KW. In pursuance of the request of the complainant, the load was enhanced and the meter was replaced on 16.08.2018. The complainant received a bill for the month of May 2019 i.e. dated 15.05.2019 from the office of the respondent vide which respondent raised a demand of Rs.130509/- though the consumption of units during the period 12.03.2019 to 10.05.2019 were shown as 474 units only. The respondent department without any reason has claimed an amount of Rs.126818/- in April 2018 on account of Sundry Charges allowances/Provisions Adjustments. Complainant requested the respondent to correct the alleged bill but the opposite party disclosed that they have charged the amount on account of calculations made by audit department for the period of Sept. 2016 to July, 2018. When the complainant sought explanation, she was told that the respondent has charged the amount on the basis of average consumption on the basis of new meter treating the load of the house in respect of the aforesaid period as 5KW whereas the actual connection load for the aforesaid period was only 1.5KW. The act and conduct of the 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 waive off the alleged bill of Rs.126818/- and to receive the remaining amount of bill as per actual consumption. Opposite party be further directed to pay a compensation of Rs.50000/- on account of suffering mental agony and harassment and Rs.5500/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in its reply has submitted that the account of the complainant was overhauled by the respondent. The bill dated 15.05.2019 issued to the complainant for amount of Rs.130509/- including therein amount of Rs.126818/- overhauled for the period of Sept.. 2016 to July 2018 by Audit department, as the meter replaced on 16.08.2018 on defective report, the account of the complainant was overhauled. The bill issued to the complainant by the respondent is legal and as per rules of the Nigam and complainant is liable to make payment of the bill amount to the respondent. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and 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.C41 and closed his evidenced on 07.07.2023. Ld. Counsel for opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R2 and closed his evidence on 19.04.2024.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. We have minutely perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. The respondent/opposite party has placed on record half margin report no.282 dated 14.08.2018. The respondent officials overhauled the account of the complainant from the period 06/16 to 07/2018 on the ground that the meter of the complainant was defective and hence the new meter was installed so the account was overhauled. The respondent took a basis from the period 16.08.2016 to 12.09.2016 i.e. of 27 days but as per our opinion the base period taken by the respondent is against the sale circular of the Nigam. The audit party prepared a wrong and illegal calculation which is against the natural justice. The audit party intentionally took the high base period, whereas the trend of monthly consumption of electricity energy is very low. The average units taken in the half margin is 1662 units whereas the trend of consumption(bimonthly) of new meter is: November 2018-540 units, January 2019- 265 units, March 2019-279 units, May 2019- 474 units. So as per our opinion higher base period has been taken with malafide intention. Half margin is illegally prepared against the rules of the Nigam as well as Electricity Act.
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 alleged amount of Rs.126818/- mentioned in the bill dated 15.05.2019 and to refund the 20% amount deposited by the complainant against the alleged bill as per order dated 26.09.2019 of this Commission alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of deposit till its realisation to the complainant. Opposite party is also directed to pay 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. It is further directed that 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.
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:
09.07.2024.
........................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
……………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member
