Haryana

Ambala

CC/37/2023

PANKAJ SUDAN. - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

vivek

23 Apr 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

Complaint case no.	:	37 of 2023
Date of Institution	:	02.02.2023
Date of decision	:	23.04.2024

1. Pankaj Sudan son of Late Sh. Mohinder Partap Sudan resident of Near Police Post No.3, Ambala City.
2. Mrs. Naresh Sharma wife of Late Sh. Mohinder Partap Sudan resident of Near Police Post No.3, Ambala City.

          ……. Complainants

                                                Versus

1. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. through Executive Engineer, Operation Division UHBVN, Ambala City, Near Vita Milk Plant, Ambala City.
2. S.D.O. Operation, Sub Division UNBVN, East Badshahi Bagh, Ambala City.

  ….…. Opposite Parties

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                    Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member.

         Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.           

 

Present:-     Shri Saravjeet Singh, Advocate, counsel for the complainants.                                                                                                                          Shri Varun Kumar Singla, Advocate, counsel for the OPs.

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Complainants have filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

1. To recall the bill dated 17.09.2022 for a sum of Rs.1,01,924/- and adjust the amount of Rs.30,000/- deposited by the complainants against the said bill in future bills.
2. To raise the fresh bill by overhauling the account of the complainants for the defective period from 23.01.2020 till the date on which the defective meter was removed in the Last week of November 2022, on the basis of consumption recorded during the corresponding period of previous year
3. To pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- on account of causing mental agony and harassment, deficiency in service and on account of adopting unfair trade practice
4. To pay cost of litigation amounting to Rs.20,000/-.

OR

Grant any other relief which this Hon’ble Commission may deems fit.

 

2.             Brief facts of the case are that Sh. Mohinder Partap Sudan who was father of complainant no. 1 and husband of complainant no. 2 has already expired. During his lifetime, Sh. Mohinder Partap Sudan had obtained from the OPs an electricity connection of domestic supply category with a sanctioned load of 4.20 KW bearing account no.4304430000 at his residence being Near Police Post No.3, Ambala City. Late Sh. Mohinder Partap Sudan was residing in the said house with the complainants until his death and after his death the said house along with the said electricity connection was inherited by complainants being the only legal heirs of Sh. Mohinder Partap Sudan. The complainants have already initiated the process for transfer of above-mentioned electricity connection on the name of complainant no. 2. They have regularly been paying the bills being raised by the OPs for the consumption of electricity and nothing was due to be paid to the OPs until the complainants were served the bill dated 06.09.2022 whereby they were called upon to pay Rs.76,549/- for the consumption of electricity for the period from 23.01.2020 to 14.06.2022. The complainants got surprised after noticing the period for which the said bill was served as the complainants have regularly been paying the bills being raised by the OPs during the said period. On the receipt of the said bill, the complainant No.1 immediately contacted OP No.2 and requested him for the correction of bill dated 06.09.2022. On the request of complaint No.1, the OP No.1 checked the official records pertaining to electricity connection of the complainants and told that the account of the complainants for the period from 23.01.2020 to 14.06.2022 was overhauled as the meter installed against the electricity connection of the complainant remained defective during said period and the bills were served to the complainant 'D' Code. Complainant no.1 represented before the OP No.2 to the effect that the bills which were served to the complainants during the aforesaid period shows the status of the meter to be accurate, so the abovementioned bill dated 06.09.2022 doesn't hold. Complainant no.1 further requested the OP No.2 to recall the said bill.  OP No.2 assured the complainants that he would look into the matter and try to resolve the issue after holding discussion with the commercial assistant in his Sub Division. The OPs again issued a bill on 17.09.2022 for the period from 14.06.2022 to 17.09.2022 for a sum of Rs.1,19,024/-. In the bill dated 17.09.2022 the amount demanded by the OPs vide bill dated 06.09.2022 was also included. The said bill dated 17.09.2022 is also incorrect and not as per the actual consumption of the complainants. After the receipt of the above mentioned bill dated 17.09.2022, the complainant no.1 again visited OP No.2 and requested him to correct both the above mentioned bills but to no avail. But to the utter dismay of the complainants, the above mentioned bills dated 06.09.2022 & 17.09.2022 were not recalled and corrected, rather OP No.2 got the electricity connection of the complainants disconnected. After the disconnection of electricity, the complainant no.1 immediately contacted OP No.2 and reminded OP No.2 of his assurance to rectify the bill consequent to which the  OP No.2  got the electricity connection of the complainants restored after depositing the part payment of Rs.30,000/-, on 22.12.2022, by the complainants. OP No.2 got the existing meter of the complainants replaced with the new meter in the last week of November 2022. Bill dated 17.09.2022 is incorrect, inflated and not as per the actual consumption made by the complainants during the alleged period. The account of the complainants for the defective period from 20.01.2020 till the removal of meter in the last week of November 2022 cannot be overhauled on the basis of reading recorded by the defective meter. In the last week again the officials from the office of OP No.2 arrived at the residence of the complainants to disconnect the electricity supply for the want of payment of remaining amount of bill dated 17.09.2022 and it was with the intervention of the respectables of the society that the complainants were able to thwart the attempt of the OP No.2 to disconnect the electricity supply. But while leaving the spot the officials threatened the complainants with the disconnection of electricity supply if the remaining of the bill dated 17.09.2022 was not deposited within a week. Hence, the present complaint.
3.           Upon notice, the OPs appeared and filed written version and raised preliminary objections with regard to maintainability, no cause of action, estoppal, not come with clean hands and suppressed the true and material facts, jurisdiction and the compliant is liable to be dismissed for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties etc.  On merits, while admitting the fact that the electric meter has been provided by the OPs at the premises of the complainants, it has been stated that the complainants were very much irregular in paying the payments of the electricity bills. The electricity bills could not be issued to the consumers due to the pandemic of Novel Corona Virus (covid-19). The department had taken the electricity charges for the period from 29-03-2020 to 14-06-2022 on average basis from the consumer and when the meter in question was checked, bills were sent for actual consumption of electricity. The complainants never contacted the OPs nor raised any objection regarding the bill dated 06.09.2022. Bill dated 06.09.2022 was sent to the consumer for the period from 2.01.2020 to 14.06.2022 i.e. of 873 days. The complainants have not paid the earlier bill and the amount of the previous bill was also added in the bill dated 17.09.2022, which was sent to the complainants for the period from 14.06.2022 to 17.09.2022 i.e. of 95 days. On the date of removal of the old meter the reading of the meter was 48004 and only the amount of consumption till 48004 was claimed by the department from the complainants. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by the OPs and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with costs.
4.           Complainants tendered affidavit of the complainant No.1 as Annexure CW/A, alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 to C-7 and closed the evidence of the complainants.  On the other hand, learned counsel for OPs tendered affidavit of Vaibhav, SDO UHBVN, Sub Division, East Badshahi Bhag, Ambala City as Annexure OP/X alongwith documents as Annexure OP-1 and OP-7 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.
5.           We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the case file.
6.           Learned counsel for the complainants submitted that by raising the excessive bill dated 06.09.2022, Annexure C-2, to the tune of Rs.76,549/- for the period from 23.01.2020 to 14.06.2022, despite the fact that they were regular in making payment towards  electricity consumed for the said period, and thereafter not  redressing the grievance of the complainants, the OPs are deficient in providing service. 
7.           On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs submitted that due to the pandemic of Novel Corona Virus (covid-19),  the electricity bills were issued on average basis and the bill dated 06.09.2022 was sent for the period from 23-01-2020 to 14-06-2022 as per actual consumption of electricity. The complainants never contacted the OPs nor raised any objection regarding the bill dated 06.09.2022, sent for the period from 02.01.2020 to 14.06.2022 i.e. of 873 days and since the complainants did not pay the earlier bill and the amount of the previous bill was also added in the bill dated 17.09.2022, Annexure C-3 which was sent to the complainants for the period from 14.06.2022 to 17.09.2022 i.e. of 95 days.
8.           It may be stated here that in the written version, it has been stated by the OPs that the electricity bills on the actual consumption of electricity city for the period from 29.03.2020 to 14.06.2022,  could not be issued to the consumer, due to pandemic of Novel Corona Virus (COVID-19), as such, electricity bills for the said period were raised on average basis and when the meter in question was checked by the OPs, actual bill dated 06.09.2022, Annexure C-2 was sent to the complainants, for the period from 23.01.2020 to 14.06.2022 for an amount of Rs.76,549/- but the complainants failed to pay the same, as a result of which, it carried sundry charges/penalties etc. To substantiate their plea, the OPs have placed on record the detail sheet showing the entire details qua meter reading, status, bills units billed etc. for the period from 29.11.2018 to 17.03.2023, Annexure OP-6. The OPs have also placed on record the document, Annexure OP-5 showing that on the date of removal of the old meter, its reading was 48004. As per OPs only the actual amount of consumption of electricity till 48004 units stood claimed by them from the complainants.  The specific stand of the OP is that the electricity bills for the period from 29.03.2020 to 14.06.2022 could not be issued to the consumer, due to pandemic of Novel Corona Virus (COVID-19), as such, electricity bills for the said period was raised on average basis from the complainants and when the meter in question was checked by the OPs, actual bill was sent to the complainants. It may be stated here that no proof has been placed on record by the complainants to show that they had paid the bills qua consumption of electricity for the period from 23.01.2020 to 14.06.2022 to the OPs. Had the complainants paid the bills qua actual consumption of electricity for the period from 23.01.2020 to 14.06.2022, they could have easily placed on record proof of the said payment but they miserably failed to do so.  Facing with this situation, we hold that there is no merit in the complaint filed by the complainants, consequently, we dismiss the same, with no order as to costs. Certified copy of the order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of costs as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced:- 23.04.2024

 

(Vinod Kumar Sharma)	(Ruby Sharma)	(Neena Sandhu)
Member	Member	President