Complainant Buta Singh has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (for short, C.P.Act.) seeking necessary directions to the opposite parties not to recover Rs.37,980/- shown in bill in dispute. Opposite parties be further directed not to disconnect his electricity supply and demand may kindly be quashed. Opposite parties be also directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation i.e. mental agony and litigation expenses etc. in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he has installed an electric connection in his house for domestic purpose bearing Account No.G 31CK640972K. He has been paying the consumption bills regularly to the opposite parties. Thus he is consumer of the opposite parties. His average bill is Rs.1000/- to Rs.1500/- per month. But surprisingly his meter jumped without any consumption and regarding this he moved an application to opposite party no.3 and Sh.Baldev Singh JE inquired the matter and also mentioned his report that meter was running without using any electricity vide report dated 7.10.2014 but after that many times he approached to the opposite party regarding the irregularity of the meter and jumping without consuming electricity and on 23.9.2015 again opposite party sent a bill amounting to Rs.37,498/- then he again approached the opposite party regarding the correction of the bill but no action has been taken by opposite parties. The act of the opposite party is illegal, null, void and against the rules and regulations of the corporation which proves clear cut deficiency in services on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.
3. Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite parties who appeared through their counsel and filed their written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the complainant has filed the false and frivolous complaint; the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands and the present complaint is not maintainable. On merits, it was submitted that the opposite party changed the meter of the complainant on the reading of 7098 units whereas the complainant has paid the bill upto 1943 units, hence the difference of 5155 units is chargeable, whereas the opposite party sent the bill on average of 87 units. The amount of Rs.37,498/- demanded by the opposite party is the unpaid charges of the consumed units. So the amount demanded by the opposite party is legal and genuine and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.
4. Complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C1, alongwith other documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C4 and closed the evidence.
5. Counsel for the opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Er.Sukhdev Raj Ex.OP-1 alongwith other documents Ex.OP2 and Ex.OP-3 and closed the evidence.
6. We have duly heard the learned counsels for both the sides in the back drop of the legally applicable merit of the supporting evidence/document(s) as produced by the litigating parties in order to statutorily resolve the inter-se dispute (under the C P Act’ 1986) prompting the present complaint. We find that the complainant had been the holder of consumer A/c # G31CK640972K and the present dispute prompted at his having in receipt of the inflated consumption Bill date 23.09.2015 for Rs.37,498/- (Ex.C4) further followed by another Bill for Rs.37,980/- (Ex.C3) and these were refused to be withdrawn in spite of the fact that the OP Corporation’s J.E. Baldev Singh upon having checked the Electric Meter on 07.10.2014 had duly mentioned on application (Ex.C2) that the Meter runs/advances (shows further reading) even without any Electric Load upon it.
7. We further find that the OP Corporation in its written reply and the evidentiary documents produced as its Affidavit Ex.OP1 (and others as: Ex.OP2 & Ex.OP3) has deposed that the impugned Bill comprised of Rs. 37,498/- for the unpaid units of 5155 as per the reading of the Meter that was changed at the application of the complainant. We find that the Meter in question was changed since it was found ‘defective’ (moving sans any electric ‘Load’) by the OP Corporation’s own JE Baldev Singh and thus it is not understood as to how the complainant shall be liable to pay for the readings of a defective Meter; without having provided with any reason (logical purpose) and/or details of the arbitrarily alleged ‘charges’ and that establishes ‘unfair trade practice’ coupled with ‘deficiency in service’ on the part of the OP service providers and that rakes them up for an ‘adverse’ statutory award under the applicable statute. Moreover, the impugned demand as put forth upon the complainant for payment of the arbitrary amount by the opposite party corporation has been admittedly not a matter of routine and the same has not even been proved to be in accordance with the legally accrued amounts as per its Sales/Distribution Policy and the Rules & Regulations etc framed, there under.
8. In the light of the all above, we partly allow the present complaint and thus ORDER the opposite party corporation to withdraw the impugned Bills in dispute (Ex.C3 & Ex.C4) and instead raise actual consumption charges as per the changed ‘in order’ Meter upon the complainant besides to pay him Rs. 5,000/- as cost and compensation within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the present orders otherwise the awarded amount shall attract interest @ 9% PA from the date of the complaint till actual payment. The complainant shall be liable to pay the applicable consumption charges only from the date of the impugned Bill onwards and thus the OP Service Providers shall raise only the appropriate Bills comprised of applicable consumption charges only.
9. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record.
(Naveen Puri)
President
Announced: (Jagdeep Kaur)
September, 27 2016 Member
*MK*
