Haryana

Karnal

CC/404/2021

Ramesh Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Rakesh Sharma

04 Mar 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                        Complaint No. 404 of 2021

                                                        Date of instt.16.08.2021

                                                        Date of Decision:04.03.2024

 

Ramesh Kumar aged about 39 years son of Shri Satpal, resident of village Sheikhpura, District Karnal.  Aadhar card no.6697 2662 6240.

 

                                            …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, Sub Division Newal, Sub Urban, Karnal through its SDO (OP).

 

                                                                   …..Opposite Party.

       

Complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Shri Jaswant Singh……President.

              Shri Vineet Kaushik……Member

              Dr. Suman Singyh…..Member

                   

Argued by: Shri R.K. Sharma, counsel for complainant

                   Shri Robin Singh, counsel for the OP.

 

                    (Dr. Suman Singh, Member)

ORDER:   

 

                  The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant is a consumer of the OP under account no.Nj-27-1828-K and is paying all the current energy charges regularly. In the month of January, 2021 the complainant received a bill dated 09.01.2021 from the OP, in which the OP illegally demanded Rs.51,234/- and after due date Rs.51992/- by allegedly shown consumed units 6768, however the complainant never consumed so high consumption at his house, because the sanctioned load of the complainant on this electricity connection is only 1KW and as per previous record of the complainant the complainant has consumed maximum units of 400 only. On receipt of the said bill, complainant approached the OP and requested to correct the said bill. On this OP sent some of  his officials at the premises of complainant and after checking, it was found that there is a fault in the meter, so they under the instructions of the OP removed the old meter and installed a new meter on the pole outside the premises of the complainant and thereafter the OP said to the complainant that there is no need to deposit the aforesaid bill amount of Rs.51,234/- and afresh bill will be issued within a short span of time. Thereafter, OP did not issue afresh bill in favour of the complainant, by correcting the amount of bill, despite repeated requests of the complainant. The grievance of complainant was not resolved at the level of the OP, so complainant moved a complaint against the OP before the C.M. Window Portal, Karnal, vide complaint no.CM/OFF/N/2021/034746 dated 13.04.2021 but it is strange on the part of the OP who allegedly conducted enquiry in this matter and uploaded Action Taken Report upon the aforesaid C.M. window Portal, Karnal on the basis of false and frivolous facts.

2.             It is further averred that in the month of June, 2021 the complainant received another bill no.04746 dated 11.06.2021 in which OP again demanded Rs.56437/- from the complainant before due date and Rs.57,271/- after due date in an illegal and unlawful manner by showing Rs.54,930/- as Allowances. After receipt of the said bill, complainant again approached the OP and requested to correct the said bill and issued the bill as per actual consumption but OP did not listen the complainant and refused to correct the same and also threatened the complainant that in case he would not deposit the abovesaid amount, then they will disconnect the electricity connection of the complainant. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. Hence this complaint.

3.             On notice, OP appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; locus standi; cause of action and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that as per record of the OP the electricity connection no.Nj-27-1828-K is Domestic Supply. In the month of January, 2021 old meter installed at the premises of the complainant was replaced with new one on oral requests of the complainant and at the time of replacing the meter of the complainant the meter reading was shown as 21700. The bill of the complainant was generated as per meter reading. It is further pleaded that the old meter which was removed from the premises of the complainant was  inspected in M& T Lab, Karnal on 06.08.2021 in presence of the complainant. During inspection “the accuracy of meter was checked and the result was found within limits”. The aforesaid report of M &T Lab was duly signed by the complainant. Some of the previous bills issued to the complainant were without reading on average basis, so the bill no.04708 dated 09.01.2021 and further bills were rightly issued as per reading recorded in the meter. In order to avoid the payment of the electricity bills, complainant has put forth false and frivolous story in his complaint. It is further pleaded that C.M. Window complaint moved by the complainant redressed by the CM Window Portal Karnal, vide ATR dated 11.05.2021 and as per the aforesaid ATR report it has been observed that bills of the complainant have been generated and issued as per reading of meter. So, the complainant is legally bound to deposit the same in the office of the OP. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

5.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, copy of C.M. Window ATR Ex.C1, copy of meter display photograph Ex.C2, electricity bills dated 09.01.2021, 10.04.2020, 11.08.2020, 10.07.2020, 12.06.2020 Ex.C3 to Ex.C7 and closed the evidence on 18.04.2023 by suffering separate statement.

6.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP has tendered into evidence affidavit of Rajinder Kumar Assistant Field (CA) Ex.OPW1/A, copy of MCO report Ex.OP1, copy of M& T Lab report Ex.OP2 and Ex.OP3, copy of meter reading pic Ex.OP4, copy of SC&AR copy Ex.OP5, copy of site verification report Ex.OP6 and closed the evidence on 04.10.2023 by suffering separate statement.

7.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

8.             Learned counsel for the complainant, while reiterating the contents of complaint, has vehemently argued that complainant is a consumer of the OP and paying all the energy charges regularly. In the month of January, 2021 the complainant received a bill of Rs.51,234/- by shown consumed units 6768, however the complainant never consumed so high consumption because the sanctioned load of the complainant on this electricity connection is only 1KW. On receipt of the said bill, complainant approached the OP and requested to correct the said bill. On this  some officials of OP checked the meter of complainant and found that there is a fault in the meter, so they removed the old meter and installed a new meter. OP said to the complainant that there is no need to deposit the aforesaid bill amount of Rs.51,234/- and afresh bill will be issued but till date OP has not issued afresh bill by correcting the amount of bill, even on repeated requests of the complainant. Complainant moved a complaint against the OP before the C.M. Window Portal, Karnal, and uploaded Action Taken Report upon the aforesaid C.M. window Portal, Karnal on the basis of false and frivolous facts, without mentioning the facts about the aforesaid illegal demand of Rs.57,271/-. He further argued that in the month of June, 2021 the complainant received another bill of Rs.56437/-. After receipt of the said bill, complainant again approached the OP and requested to correct the said bill  and issued the bill as per actual consumption but OP did not listen the complainant and refused to correct the same and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

9.             Per contra, learned counsel for the OP, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that in the month of January, 2021 old meter installed at the premises of the complainant was replaced with new one on oral requests of the complainant and at the time of replacing the meter of the complainant the meter reading was shown as 21700. The bill of the complainant generated as per meter reading. The old meter which was removed from the premises of the complainant was inspected in M& T Lab, Karnal on 06.08.2021 in presence of the complainant. During inspection “the accuracy of meter was checked and the result was found within limits”. The aforesaid report of M &T Lab was duly signed by the complainant. Some of the previous bills issued to the complainant were without reading on average basis, so the bill no.04708 dated 09.01.2021 and further bills were rightly issued as per reading recorded in the meter. He further argued that  C.M. Window complaint moved by the complainant redressed by the CM Window Portal Karnal, vide ATR dated 11.05.2021 and as per the aforesaid ATR report it has been observed that bills of the complainant have been generated and issued as per reading of meter and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

10.           We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

11.           On the request of the complainant, in the month of January, 2021 old meter installed at the house of the complainant was replaced with new one. Op has alleged that at the time of replacing the meter, reading was shown as 21700 but the complainant has paid only uto 14801 units. The onus to prove its version was relied upon the OP. OP has proved is version by placing on the file MCO report Ex.OP1 and M& T Lab report Ex.OP2 and Ex.OP3.

12.           The old meter which was removed from the premises of the complainant was inspected in M&T Lab. Karnal on 06.08.2021 in the presence of the complainant and during inspection the accuracy of meter checked and the result was found within limits. The checking report Ex.OP3 dated 06.08.2021 was prepared and which bearing the signature of the complainant and reading was found 21700. The said report was neither rebutted nor challenged by the complainant.

13.           Complainant was relied upon the electricity bill Ex.C3 dated 09.01.2021, Ex.C4 dated 10.04.2020, Ex.C5 dated 11.08.2020, Ex.C6 dated 10.07.2020 and Ex.C7 dated 12.06.2020. On perusal of the said bills, it reveals that the old reading of the last bill is only upto 14801 units. At the time of removing the old meter reading was 21700 and complainant has paid electricity bill only upto the reading of 14801 units. Complainant has failed to prove on record that he has paid the bills upto the reading of 21700. It has been proved that complainant has not cleared the bill as per actual consumption.

14.           Further, complainant has also moved a complaint against the OP before the C.M.  Window. As per report Ex.C1 of the SDO ‘OP’ UHBVN, Newal at the time of removing the older meter reading was shown as 21700. Complaint moved before C.M. Window redressed by the C.M. Window Portal Karnal, vide ATR dated 13.04.2021 and as per the aforesaid ATR report it has been observed that bills of the complainant have been generated and issued as per the reading of meter. Complainant has not cleared the electricity bills as per consumption and OP has sent the electricity bills as per actual consumption.

15.           Thus, in view of the above discussion, the present complaint is devoid of merit and same deserves to be dismissed and same is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance. 

Announced

Dated:04.03.2024                                                                    

                                                                President,

                                                    District Consumer Disputes

                                                    Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

 

 (Vineet Kaushik)       (Dr. Suman Singh)

  Member                   Member