Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 410
Instituted on : 27.07.2021
Decided on : 19.12.2022.
Bimla Devi aged-59 years W/o Sh. Subhash Chander R/o H.No. 950-A, Bharat Colony, Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
XEN, Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Rohtak, Haryana Power House Shehri, Model Town, Delhi Road, Rohtak.
……….Opposite party
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Complainant in person.
Sh. Sanjeev Kumar, ALM for opposite party.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that she is having an electric connection bearing account No.9969460000. The complainant has received a bill of Rs.5800/- for the month of December and January 2021 which was more than her consumption. She got checked her electricity but everything was in OK condition. Thereafter she immediately informed the electricity department and they changed her meter but did not pay any attention to the fault and did not notice the work load. Opposite party issued a second bill of Rs.7489/- for the month of February and March 2021 which was also more than her consumption but opposite party did not pay attention to the meter and line. On 23.04.2021 complainant got checked her meter from the private electrician and it was found that there was fault in the main line and the connection of the neighbor was installed in a wrong manner. The said electrician rectified the fault of line and the meter started running smoothly. The complainant requested the opposite party many times to remove such fault but opposite party did not pay any heed. She also wrote letters dated 23.04.2021/16.06.2021/24.06.2021/29.06.2021 to XEN, S.D.O. for rectifying the bills. One Ravinder, Line Man of the opposite party visited the house of complainant and he was apprised of the whole situation on the basis of evidence. The said Ravinder asked the complainant to contact Mr. Rakesh about this matter. Both the persons gave assurance to her that due to wrong connection of her neighbor, electricity bill was increasing and after reporting this matter, the bill shall be rectifies. The complainant requested the opposite party to rectify the alleged bills but any heed was not paid to her request. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that the case of the complainant be considered on sympathatical grounds as the complainant is unable to pay the alleged bills without consumption.
2. Notice of the present complaint was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party appeared and filed its written reply stating therein that meter of the complainant was checked by the officials of the respondent on the application of complainant and her meter was replaced. It is wrong that the matter was reported to the opposite party regarding any fault in the line. She herself admits that the electricity line was got checked by her from a private electrician which was illegal and wrong. The private electrician is unauthorized even to touch the electricity line of the Nigam and the complainant has adopted wrong practice of calling private and unauthorized person to work on the Nigam line and to disturb the system by an illegal unauthorized and irresponsible person. Even the Nigam employee in not authorized to work on the electricity line without obtaining permit to work from the competent authority.
3. Complainant in her evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C7 and closed his evidence on dated 31.05.2022. On the other hand, Sanjeev Kumar, ALM for opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A and documents Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-3 and closed his evidence on dated 29.06.2022.
4. We have heard ld. counsel for the parties and gone through the material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. In the present case, as per the applications Ex.C1 to Ex.C3, it is submitted by the complainant that there was some fault in her meter which was giving consumption even in closed condition. She informed the same to the opposite party and opposite party replaced the meter but even the new meter also worked same as first meter. It is further submitted that due to non removal of fault by the opposite party, complainant had to pay excessive bills. Copy of bills Ex.C5 is also placed on record. On the other hand opposite party has placed on file copy of ledger Ex.R2 and copy of meter change order Ex.R3. Perusal of Ex.R3 shows that the meter of the complainant was changed on dated 08.03.2021 on the ground that : “Consumer was not satisfied with accuracy”. We have also observed the ledger Ex.R2 which shows that there was excess consumption in the meter of the complainant for the period 27.02.2020 to 21.04.2022 whereas earlier the consumption of the complainant was less. Hence the opposite party is liable to overhaul the account of complainant.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we herby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to take the average of six bills w.e.f. 21.04.2021 to 19.04.2022 and on the basis of alleged average consumption, rectify the bills for the period 27.02.2020 to 20.04.2021 and issue a fresh bill for the said period without any penalty, surcharge or interest to the complainant. It is made clear that the opposite party shall adjust the amount already paid by the complainant against the alleged bills, to refund the amount charged in excess from the complainant(if any) and also to pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant and to adjust the alleged awarded amount 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:
19.12.2022.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
…………………………………
Tripti Pannu, Member.
…………………………………
Vijender Singh, Member
