Haryana

Ambala

CC/239/2013

GULSHAN KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

X.E.N UHBVNL - Opp.Party(s)

ASHUTOSH AGGARWAL

04 Jul 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

 

                                                          Complaint case no.        : 239 of 2013

                                                          Date of Institution         :  12.09.2013

                                                          Date of decision   :            03.04.2017

 

          Gulshan Kumar S/o Kallu Ram, R/o H.No.73, Manuli House, Ambala City.    

  

……. Complainant.

 

1.       X.E.N, UHBVNL, Sub Division, Model Town, Ambala City.  

2.       S.D.O., UHBVNL, Sub Division Town, Ambala City.

 

 ….…. Respondents.

 

BEFORE:   SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT

                   SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER         

                   MS. AMAMIKA GUPTA, MEMBER                

 

Present:       Sh. Ashish Sareen, counsel for complainant.

                   Sh. Vikas Sharma, counsel for OP.

 

ORDER:

                   In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint are that the complainant is having electricity connection vide account No.MT03-2619-N  and OP NO.2 have raised an unjustified demand of Rs.8075/- vide memo No.602/MT-Audit-H/M dated 22.03.2013. Further submitted that the complainant visited the office of OP just after receiving the demand letter for the clarification of above said memo dated 22.03.2013 and the complainant was shocked to hear from the officials of OP that the demand was for the period of July 2010 and the same one is the less accessed average reading after replacing the defected electric meter. Further submitted that after a demand vide memo dated 22.03.2013 the OP attached a sum of Rs.5428/- in the electric bill of above said connection as sundry charges/allowances and the complainant again visited the office of OP for clarification of the attached amount of Rs.5428/- in the bill for the month of May 2013 and the OP No.2 makes complainant satisfied that the previous demand was not justified and therefore we have reduced the demand from Rs.8075/- to 5428/-. Complainant further submitted that on 27.06.2013, the complainant had made a representation to OP No.2 but till date no reply has been received by the complainant and the OPs are demanding the above said unjustified/unexplained amount from complainant which is causing tension and unnecessarily harassment to complainant. Hence the present complaint.

2.                Upon notice, Ops appeared and filed written statement submitting that the meter of the complainant was defective one and it is changed by the OP on 17.05.2011 and the letter was issued as per the less accessed average reading after replacing the defected electric meter as per the Audit Report and after verify the record of complainant OP reduced the amount of letter dated 22.03.2013.

3                 To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure C-X along with documents as annexure C-1 to C-8 and close his evidence. On the other hand, counsel for the Ops has also tendered affidavit as Annexure R-X alongwith documents as Annexure R-1 to R-5 and close his evidence.

4.                We have heard counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the case file. Counsel for the complainant has argued that OP No.2 have raised an unjustified demand of Rs.8075/- vide memo No.602/MT-Audit-H/M dated 22.03.2013 as per Annexure C-1 and the demand was for the period of July 2010. Further argued that the demand vide memo dated 22.03.2013 the OP attached a sum of Rs.5428/- in the electric bill as above said connection as Sundry charges/allowances as per Annexure C-6. In the way the OP has wrongly demanding the above said unjustified and unexplained amount from the complainant.

                   On the other hand, counsel for OPs has argued that the meter of the complainant was defective one and it is changed by the OP on 17.05.2011 and the letter was issued as per the less accessed average reading after replacing the defected electric meter as per the Audit Report and after verify the record of complainant OP reduced the amount of letter dated 22.03.2013 as per Annexure       R-1.

5.                 In view of above said discussion, it is clear that OP has issued a demand of Rs.8075/- to the complainant vide memo No.602/MT-Audit-H/M dated 22.03.2013 for the period of October 2010 to June 2011 on less accessed average reading after replacing the defected electric meter and the OPs after verify the record reduced the amount of Rs.5397/- from 8075/- as per Annexure R-1 i.e. Audit Report. The OPs have accepted the genuine request of the complainant and rectify the above said amount and the complainant is liable to pay amount of Rs.5428/- including Advance Consumption Deposit (Rs.5394/- + Rs.31/- = 5428/-) to the OPs. So, there is no deficiency on the part of the OPs. Hence, the present complaint is hereby dismissed with as no order as to costs. Copies of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

Announced on :  03.04.2017                                                  (D.N. ARORA)

                                                                                       President

    

     (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                       Member

 

          (ANAMIKA GUPTA)

                                                                                       Member