Haryana

Panchkula

01/2015

SHISH PAL SINGH. - Complainant(s)

Versus

UTTRI HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM. - Opp.Party(s)

MUKESH KUMAR.

14 May 2015

ORDER

  

BEFORE  THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM  PANCHKULA                                                       

Consumer Complaint No.	01/ 2015
Date of Institution	01/01/2015
Date of Decision	14/05/2015

Shish Pal son of Sh.Bahadur Singh R /o H.No 3002, Sector 15 Panchkula

                                                                                          ….Complainant

Versus

1.       Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam through its Managing DirectorShakti Bhawan, Sector 6 Panchkula.

2.       Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, through Sub Divisional Officer (Operation), City Sub Division, Industrial Area, Phase II Panchkula.

                                                                          ….Opposite Parties

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC 12 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 1986.

 

Quorum                 Mr.Dharam Pal, President

Mrs.Anita Kapoor, Member

 

For the Parties        Mr.Mukesh Kumar Adv. for the complainant                              Mr.Ashwani Chaudhary Adv. for the Ops

 

ORDER

(Dharam Pal President)

 

1. Shish Pal-complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against the Ops with the averments that he has an electric connection bearing ac No.A21 PC11-0721-M and paying the electricity bill regularly. Unfortunately the meter of the complainant became defective and started giving exaggerated consumption which came to the notice through bill issued by the Ops for the month of February 2014. On receipt of the electricity bill No.001447 dated 10.02.2014 the complainant approached the OP No.2 and requested to correct the bill as the same was not as per actual consumption and to replace the defective meter but the OP No.2 kept on issuing the bill of exaggerated amount to the complainant. Thereafter the complainant again requested the Op No.2 to correct the bill and replace the defective meter but to no avail. On 28.08.2014 the complainant again requested the Ops to replace the defective meter but the Op No.2 asked the complainant to deposit Rs.10,000  Rs.6000 against the bill amount and the same would be adjusted in future bills after checking the meter reading of new meter. The complainant deposited the amount of Rs.10,000/ Annexure C 10on the same day under protest. Ultimately on 09.09.2014 the officials of Ops checked and inspected the meter as well as load vide checking report dated 09.09.2014 Annexure C 1. The load measured by the Ops follows as under 

Fan 3 x .60                                          = 180

CFL 6 x .015                                       =   90

TU   1 x 0120                                      = 120

Fridge 1 x .250                                    = 250

Cooler 1x .280                                     = 280

W Machine 1 x .500                            = 500

Power Point Socket 1 x 1000              = 1000

                                                   

                                                   Total = 2.420                 

Thereafter, the electricity meter of the complainant was replaced by the Ops and the consumption shown by the new meter reading in order but the Ops did not correct the bills for the period from February 2014 to September 2014. The complainant made several requests to the Op No.2 to correct the bills and to adjust the amount of Rs.10000/  Rs.6000/ deposited by the complainant but to no avail rather threatened to disconnect the electricity connection if the complainant failed to deposit the billed amount. The complainant also requested the officers of OP No.2 but in vain. This act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service on their part. Hence this complaint.

2. In reply the Ops filed written statement by taking some preliminary objections and submitted that the complaint is not maintainable under the provision of Electricity Act 2003 as well as in view of Sales Circular of the Nigam. It is submitted that in case of theft, the Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction to try and entertain the complaint. It is submitted that firstly, the consumer approached the Ops for redressal of his grievances if he was not satisfied with the action taken for redressal of grievance, he could have approached the XEN op for redressal of his grievances but the consumer has not approached the competent authority for his grievances. It is submitted that the Nigam has specifically constituted the Consumer Grievances Redressal ForumCGRF at Shakti Bhawan Panchkula which has all powers to entertain the billing complaints. It is submitted that the account No.PC11721 having sanctioned load 2 KW installed in the premises of the complainant for supply of electricity. It is submitted that as per consumption data record of complaint, the consumed units from the billing cycle of November, 2013 to August, 2014 till the meter replaced vide MCO dated 09.09.2014 was 265 826 1058, 4006 and 2949 units. It is submitted that the complainant made a complaint to the Ops in regard of working of meter, the premises of the complainant was inspected by the officials of Ops and the meter was checked which was removed and packed in a cardboard box in the presence of Ms.Vandana representative of complainant vide LL-1 dated 09.09.2014 which was duly singed by her. The meter was sent to M & T Lab, Dhulkot for checking the accuracy of meter. During checking the meter was found 19.97 i.e. upto the billing cycle for the month of 12/14 and a sum of Rs.57045/- was due against the complainant so he was liable to make the amount on account of consumption of electricity. It is denied that the complainant was paying the electricity bills regularly. It is denied that the Ops told the complainant that the amount deposited by the complainant should be adjusted in future bills after checking the meter. It is denied that the complainant deposited the amount under protest rather he deposited the amount on his sweet will. It is submitted that the complainant was using excessive load against the sanctioned load of 2 KW for which he is liable to pay the penalty amount as per rules of Nigam. It is denied that the Ops threatened the complainant. Thus, there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. In order to substantiate his case the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Annexure C-A alongwith documents Annexure C-1 to C-13 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, counsel for the Ops has tendered into evidence by way of affidavit Annexure R-A alongwith document Annexure R-1 to R-3 and closed the evidence.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the file & documents placed on record.
5. Admittedly, the complainant has electricity connection No.A21-PC11-0721-M. As per the complainant, he was paying electricity bill regularly. However during the month of February 2014 he noticed that the consumption shown in the electricity bill is on exaggerated consumption. He made a complaint on 06.03.2014 Annexure C-2 to the effect that the meter installed in his house is faulty and showing the wrong reading. He again made a complaint (Annexure C-3). However, the Ops checked the premises of the complainant on 09.09.2014 removed the meter and installed a new meter vide checking report dated 09.09.2014 Annexure C-1. In the checking report, the connected load has been shown 2.420 against the connected load of 2 Kws. But the OPs have not taken any action in this regard. From the documents, it reveals that the electricity bills issued by the Ops for the period from 10.12.2012 to 08.02.2013 Annexure C-4 and unit consumed have been shown 269 units. The consumption units for the period from 08.04.2013 to 08.06.2013 Annexure C-5 have been shown 240. The consumption units for the period from 08.08.2013 to 08.10.2013 Annexure C-6 have been 326. The consumption units for the period from 08.12.2013 to 10.02.2014 Annexure C-7 have been shown 826. The consumption units for the period from 10.02.2014 to 10.04.2014 Annexure C-8 have been shown 1058. The consumption units for the period from 10.04.2014 to 10.06.2014 Annexure C-9 have been shown 4006. The consumption units for the period from 10.06.2014 to 10.08.2014 Annexure C-11 have been 2949. However, after changing the meter, the consumption units for the period from 10.08.2014 to 10.10.2014 Annexure C-12
6.  have been shown 169. The consumption units for the period from 10.10.2014 to 10.12.2014
7. Annexure C-13
8.  have been shown 270. It is also admitted fact that the meter installed at the premises of the complainant was got checked from M & T lab
9.  Dholkot for accuracy checking and it was found
10. 19.97 faster  upto the billing circle for the month of 12/2014 and a sum of Rs.57045/- was due against the complainant. From the above, it is clear that the meter installed at the premises of the complainant was faulty from the month of February 2014 to September, 2014 and the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.10000 under protest
11. Annexure C-10
12. The complainant has challenged the accuracy of the meter and there was an error of  19.97 Annexure R-1. The details of consumption from 12/13 to 2/15 have been placed on file by the Ops Annexure R-3.
13. In view of the facts and circumstances discussed above, the Ops as per their checking report dated 01.10.2014 Annexure R1 the meter of the complainant running fast to the extent of  19.97. The Ops have not overhauled the account of the complainant and charged Rs.57045. The charging of this amount of Rs.57045 from the complainant who is a domestic consumer does not appear to be legal reasonable and this imposition of the amount may and may not be on the basis of actual consumption for the period from February 2014 to August 2014 and apart from this no prior notice has been issued to the complainant.
14. In view of the above, the complaint is allowed and demand of Rs.57045 by the Ops is ordered to be quashed with the direction to the Ops to charge the complainant for a period from February 2014 to September 2014 when the meter remained faulty/defective on the average consumption basis of the last 6 months of the preceding year of the same months. The Ops are further directed that the amount deposited by the complainant may be adjusted in the future bills.
15. Let the order be complied with within the period of 30 days from the receipt of certified copy of this order.  A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced

14-05-2015                Anita Kapoor                             Dharam Pal

                                        Member                                     President

 

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

    

                                  

                                                       Dharam Pal

                                                       President