Haryana

Panchkula

CC/226/2017

ASHOK KUMAR JAIN. - Complainant(s)

Versus

UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

GAGANDEEP GOEL,SAKKSHI AWASTHI

30 Nov 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,  PANCHKULA.

                                                       

Consumer Complaint No	:	226 of 2017
Date of Institution	:	10.10.2017
Date of Decision	:	30.11.2018

 

Ashok Kumar Jain son of Sh. Kesar Chand Jain Resident of House No.1244, Sector 7, Panchkula, Haryana.

 

                                                                                 ….Complainant

Versus

Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, (UHBVNL) through its Authorized person, Vidyut Sadan, Plot No.:C16, Sector-6, Panchkula, Haryana, India.

….Opposite Party

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Before:              Mr.Satpal, President.

Mr.Jagmohan Singh, Member.

Ms. Ruby Sharma, Member.

 

For the Parties:   Mr. Gagandeep Goel, Advocate for complainant. 

Mr.Y.P.Rana, Advocate for OP.

ORDER

(Satpal, President)

1.     The brief facts of the present complaint as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant is having account No.3789788445 and Meter No.7135100A. The complainant has been paying his electricity bills regularly and the last payment was made vide PAYTM (money transfer mode), vide ID No.3270065359 on 21.05.2017 and details of the bill are as follows:- Old Account No.2113203UCOT0008, Bill No.378972286510, date of issue 04.05.2017, Cycle/2 Group AIYB/03U and Bill Month: May, 2017 and the above mentioned bill did not mention any over-draft/over-due/arrears of any amount and everything was absolutely going fine. Thereafter, in the month of July, 2017, the complainant received a bill dated 27.07.2017 wherein consumption of 8391 units was shown for a duration of 542 days and the total bill due was shown to be Rs. 42,562/-. In the month of September, 2017, the complainant received a bill dated 03.10.2017 wherein consumption of 8778 units was shown to be done by the complainant for a duration of 47 days and total bill due was shown to be Rs.69,609/- and the total bill shown to be outstanding towards the complainant has been calculated as Rs.1,12,171/-. Further, all the bills were cleared in the month of May, 2017. But in the bills dated 19.07.2017 and 08.09.2017 a total period of 589 days and total bill amount is Rs.1,12,171/- has been shown. It is further stated that the complainant has been billed on the basis of the highest slab and he has been forced to pay almost Rs.11 per unit. Previously also, as per bill for the month of January, 2017 an amount of Rs.6,017/- was shown to be due for a consumption for 335 days. As the complainant did not want to contest the bill for lack of time, therefore, he paid the bill. The previous bills were clear and the charges were imposed on an average basis and the actual consumption of the electricity was only 9 units. The complainant also sent a legal notice to the OP, but did not receive any reply nor action was initiated by the OP; this act and conduct of the OP amounts to deficiency in service on his part; hence, this complaint.

2.     Upon notice, the OP has appeared and filed the written statement taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable on the ground of locus standi and that the complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands as he has suppressed true and material facts from this Forum. It is stated that the complainant is not the consumer of OP. It is submitted that an electricity connection bearing account No.0147650000 was installed in the name of Sh. Kesar Chand. Earlier the said connection was in the name of Sh. Kesar Chand and thereafter, the same was transferred in the name of the complainant i.e. Sh. Ashok Kumar Jain and the OP was issuing the bill in respect of consumed units. Therefore, OP had issued a bill dated 21.01.2016 for the period from 20.06.2015 to 20.10.2016 for an amount of Rs.19,020/-; thereafter the account holder had paid the part payment of Rs.7020/- on 20.01.2016 with the OP. Thereafter, the OP had issued the bill No.378976336229 dated 19.07.2017 for the period from 21.01.2016 to 15.07.2017 for an amount of Rs.42,582/-. But the account holder had not deposited the same with OP. Thereafter, again the OP had issued the bill No.378978934141 dated 08.09.2017 for the period from 15.07.2017 to 31.08.2017 for an amount of Rs.1,12,171/- including the arrears and surcharge etc. but the complainant had not deposited the same with the OP. Thereafter, again the OP had issued the bill No.378974162211 dated 07.11.2017 for the period from 31.08.2017 to 28.10.2017 for an amount of Rs.1,28,633/- including the arrears and surcharge etc. but the complainant again had not deposited the same with the OP. Therefore, the complainant is defaulter in making the payment of arrears of bill to the OP and OP reserved its right to recover the outstanding bill amount from the complainant. It is further stated that the OP had not deposited the outstanding bill amount with the OP except the amount of Rs.7020/- from the above mentioned detailed bills. The complainant has not deposited the bill amount till date. It is further submitted that the OP is not in receipt of the legal notice issued by the complainant and that no alleged notice was received by the OP. The complainant has to pay the outstanding amount of the OP as mentioned in the preliminary objections; thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP and as such, the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs. 

3.     The complainant has tendered affidavit as Annexure CA along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-6 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OP tendered affidavit Annexure RA in evidence and closed the evidence on behalf of OP.  

4.     During the course of arguments Ms. Daisy Dattana CA/J.E Authorized Representative for the OP made a statement on 30.10.2018 that after making the necessary rectification in the account of the complainant from July 2017 to October 2018 an amount of Rs.7575/- is payable by the complainant for which bill is being issued on 30.10.2018. The said authorized representative again on 19.11.2018 made an another statement as follows:-

        “ Stated that in continuation of my earlier statement dated 30.10.2018, I stated that the disputed amount of Rs.42,562/- pertaining to the period from 7/17 to 10/18 has already been adjusted by way of charging Rs.7575/- after making necessary rectification as per rules. Now, the bill dated 12.11.2018 amounting to Rs.8403/- including the payable amount of Rs.7575/- has been generated and the same is being delivered to the complainant for making payment. The grievances of the complainant stands redressed as per rules and he is liable to make the payment of Rs.8403/- including the payable amount of Rs.7575/-.”

        The complainant also made a statement on 19.11.2018 which is reproduced as under:-

        “Stated that I have received a photocopy of bill dated 12.11.2018 amounting to Rs.8403/- including the payable amount of Rs.7575/- and I request that compensation and litigation expenses total amount to Rs.50,000/- may kindly be given to the complainant.”

5.     From the above statements made by both the parties it is clear that the grievances of the complainant stands redressed qua the disputed electrical bill and now, he has no grievances with regard to the disputed bill. However, the complainant has made a request vide his statement dated 19.11.2018 that he may be compensated for the expenses incurred by him on account of litigation charges. It is clear that the OP did not make the necessary rectifications in the account of the complainant at the initial stage i.e. when the legal notice was issued by the complainant and when the complaint was filed by him in this Forum. There is no doubt with regard to the fact that the complainant was compelled to approach this Forum by way of filing the present complaint solely because of the lapse and deficiency of the OP; hence, the complainant deserves to be compensated.

6.     As a sequel of above discussion, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant by directing the Op to pay Rs.5,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment and further to pay Rs.5000/- as cost of litigation charges.

7.     The OP shall comply with the order within a period of 30 days from the date of communication of copy of this order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to approach this Forum for initiation of proceedings under Section 25 and 27 of CP Act, against the OPs. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties to the complaint and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced

30.11.2018         RUBY SHARMA      JAGMOHAN SINGH       SATPAL

                          MEMBER               MEMBER               PRESIDENT

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

                                         SATPAL

                                         PRESIDENT