Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.

                                                                   Complaint No. : 157

                                                                   Instituted on     : 04.03.2020

                                                                   Decided on       : 30.07.2024

Rajinder Kumar age 61 years s/o Sh.CharanDassChitkara R/o H.No.11, Mansarover Colony, Rohtak-124001.

                                                                   ……….………….Complainant.

                                      Vs.

Uttar Haryana BijliVitran Nigam Ltd.(UHBVNL) Rohtak through SDO ‘Op’ Sub-Divn. No.1, Rohtak.

...........……Respondent/opposite party.

          COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2086.

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.

                   DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER

Present:       Sh.LalitNayyar, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.AjayDua, Advocate for the opposite parties. 

                                      ORDER

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

1.                Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are  that  he is having domestic electricity connection bearing no.7435290000 and an electricity meter with load of 2.0KW has been installed at the premises of the complainant by the respondent department. The complainant received an electricity bill for the period 04.01.2019 to 20.03.2019 amounting toRs.22888/- for 2965 units which was very high  as the complainant did not consume the said units. But under the compelling circumstances the complainant made the payment of this bill. Similarly the complainant received the bill for the period 20.03.2019 to 05.05.2019 for 3492 units amounting to Rs.26885/-, 09.05.2019 to 10.07.2019 amounting to Rs.77940/- for 9836 units. Complainant also made the payment of Rs.26885/- and for other bills he made provisional payment of Rs.5000/- after correction by respondent.   Complainant made complaint on 11.07.2019 and  02.08.2019 and requested the officials of  opposite party to check the meter and correct the bill and issue the amended bill as per consumption of the complainant.  The officials of opposite party visited the premises of complainant and removed the electricity meter and installed a new meter on 25.07.2019 but refused to correct the bill. The previous meter of the complainant was checked by the respondent and it was found to be O.K. During replacement, the meter was found running despite supply output line was closed during the visit of JE of the opposite party.  Thereafter the complainant received the bill for the period 10.07.2019 to 10.09.2019 of units 3263 +8367 amounting to Rs.171660/- but in the compelling circumstances complainant made provisional payment of this bill Rs.5000/- on 08.09.2019 on the advise of opposite party. The complainant made many complaints in the grievances cell of the respondents on 12.08.2019, 12.09.2019, 15.11.2019 and 13.02.2020. He also made complaint to the respondent on 06.11.2019 and on 14.11.2019 the respondent inspected the premises of the complainant and found that there is a fault of the cable of UHBVNL. Thereafter cable was changed by the officials of respondent. The problem and fault was only in the cable of the respondent due to which higher bill was issued to the complainant. When all the consumption points of the complainant were disconnected even then the meter was found running due to that fault in the cable of the opposite party. The respondent also issued bill for the period of 10.09.2019 to 23.11.2019 for 9641 units amounting to Rs.247985/- which was also on very excessive side. The grievances cell has also admitted the fault of the respondent vide letter dated 09.01.2020, the XEN of respondent directed to overhaul the account of complainant of 08/2019 by taking base unit1040 for the month of 07/2018.  But his bills were not rectified by the opposite party and the opposite party again issued a bill of Rs.217815/- for units consumed 201, by adding the amount of previous bills. 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  restrain the respondent from recovering the bill of Rs.217815/- in furtherance of above mentioned impugned bills for the period 23.11.2019 to 07.01.2020 from the complainant, to declare the same as illegal, to correct the bills, to pay compensation of Rs.50000/- on account of mental agony & harassment and Rs.15000/- 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 opposite party issued bills as  per units consumed by the complainant. It is denied that the bills issued by the respondent were on the excessively higher side as the complainant did not consume the said units.  On the request of complainant,  the respondent gave permission to deposit part payment of Rs.5000/- and not after the correction  by the respondent. It is correct that the bill amounting to Rs.171600/- was issued and complainant paid Rs.5000/- as part payment with his own sweet will. The complainant also made a provisional payment of Rs.3000/- against a bill of Rs.217815/- with his own sweet will, not as per the instruction of 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.C31 and closed his evidence on dated 25.06.2021. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R4 and thereafter failed to conclude its evidence. As such the evidence of opposite party was closed by the order dated 26.04.2022 of this Commission.

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 received for the period 01.01.2019 to 20.03.2019 amounting to Rs.22888/-. It has been further submitted that again the complainant received a wrong and excessive bill for the period 20.03.2019 to 05.05.2019 showing the consumed units as 3492 and bill amount of Rs.26685/-. Thereafter the another wrong and excessive bill has been issued by the department for the period 09.05.2019 to 10.09.2019 showing the consumed units as 9836  and the total bill for the period issued as Rs.77940/-. The complainant moved an application with respondents and meter has been checked by the technician of the respondent department. An application has been moved on 06.11.2019 by the complainant before the respondent department for excessive bill with the contention that: “In this connection please refer my complaint dated 04.11.2019 and as per your advice on 17.09.2019 I have got checked the internal fitting by the electrician on different days and found the fitting is all right. The supply from the Board was disconnected from the main switch and still the meter is showing consumption and recording. The official from the board has visited on 05.11.2019 and made video of the meter on and switch board and found that the meter is showing consumption and recording. Even after the supply to main switch Board is discontinued”. After considering the application the respondent officials deputed his technician and other officials to check the meter of the complainant  and ALM and other officials made a report at the bottom of the application submitting therein that: “There was fault in outgoing HT cable. Due to this reason the meter was running fast. The HT cable of the consumer has been replaced and the supply is restored. The meter is running OK”. Thereafter the complainant moved an another application with the respondent which has been placed on record as Ex.C7. In this application the complainant has submitted that he has paid the excessive bill for the period of March 2019 amounting to Rs.21194/-,  May 2019 amounting to Rs.26885/-, July 2019 amounting to Rs.75741/-(provisionally paid), September 2019 amounting to Rs.91927/-(provisionally paid) and lastly he has not paid the bill for the month of November 2019 which has been issued as Rs.79479/- and prayed for overhauling his account. We have minutely perused the documents placed on record by both the parties and came into the conclusion that  the respondent officials admitted this fact that the meter of the complainant was running fast due to fault in HT outgoing cable so excessive bill has been issued to the complainant for the period 01.01.2019 to 14.11.2019. As per payment history given on Ex.C24 the complainant had paid anapproximatelyamount of Rs.4000/- to 6000/- from the period 20.03.2017 to 10.01.2019. On dated 10.01.2019 the complainant paid the actual consumption bill as Rs.962/-. As per complainant he received wrong bills from the period 04.01.2019 to 14.11.2019. We have also perused the document Ex.C27. In this bill subsequent consumption has been mentioned. As per Ex.C27, in the bimonthly bill of March the complainant consumed 516 units(440.21+76.65), in the bimonthly bill of June 416 units and inthe bimonthly billof July 1325 units. Hence after considering the previous and subsequent bills of the disputed period we came to the conclusion that excessive bills have been issued by the department due to fault in the outgoing HT cable from the period  January 2019 to December 2019.  Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and opposite party is liable to overhaul the account of complainant and to rectify the bills.

6.                In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to overhaul the account of complainant from 10.01.2019 to 31.12.2019 after considering the bills for the subsequent period from January 2020 to July 2020(3/2020 for 516 units, 06/2020 416 units 07/2020 for 1325 units) and to issue a fresh bill to the complainant. Opposite party is further directed that after overhauling the account of complainant, the amount of bill charged in excess from the complainant, the same shall be adjusted in future bills of the complainant. Opposite party is also directed to adjust 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 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:

30.07.2024.

                                                          ........................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

                                                          ..........................................

                                                          TriptiPannu, Member.

                                                          ……………………………….

                                                          Vijender Singh, Member