Punjab

Barnala

CC/34/2017

Davinder Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

PSPCL - Opp.Party(s)

Paramjit Singh Masouen

09 Mar 2018

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/34/2017
 
1. Davinder Kumar
S/o Om Parkash Gupta, R/o Choudhary Street Roop Chand Road, Tapa District Barnala
Barnala
Punjab
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. PSPCL
1.Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd, Tapa I, Barnala Bathinda Road through its Sub Divisional Officer.2.Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd,Sub Urban Division Dhanaula Road Barnala,through its Senior Executive Engineer.3.Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd,The Mall Patiala through its Chairman
Barnala
Punjab
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Sukhpal Singh Gill PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MS. MS. VANDNA SIDHU MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 09 Mar 2018
Final Order / Judgement

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BARNALA, PUNJAB.


 

Complaint Case No : 34/2017

Date of Institution : 21.03.2017

Date of Decision : 09.03.2018

Davinder Kumar s/o Sh. Om Parkash Gupta, resident of Choudhary Street, Roop Chand Road, Tapa, District Barnala.

…Complainant

Versus

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Tapa-I, Barnala Bathinda Road, through its Sub Divisional Officer.

2. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Sub-Urban Division, Dhanaula Road, Barnala, through its Senior Executive Engineer.

3. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, The Mall, Patiala, through its Chairman.

…Opposite Parties

Complaint Under Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present: Sh. P.S. Masouen counsel for the complainant.

Ms. Bhawna Markanda counsel for opposite parties.

Quorum.-

1. Shri Sukhpal Singh Gill : President

2. Ms. Vandna Sidhu : Member

ORDER

(MS. VANDNA SIDHU MEMBER)

As per complaint No. 34 of 2017 the complainant is the consumer of opposite parties vide electricity connection No. L62GT620016H domestic supply and have deposited all the electricity bills. Surprisingly he received a bill dated 6.3.2017 for the period from 2.2.2017 to 6.3.2017 for sum of Rs. 29,100/- indicating the consumption of 3751 Units inspite of fact that being the domestic supply but the complainant cannot consume such a huge consumption of electricity in this winter season. Further, in the said bill the consumption of last 6 months have been indicated does not match even near to it and having a much difference with the new reading.

2. It is further submitted that the complainant immediately approached the opposite party No. 1 for checking of his meter and for correction of the bill amount and also requested to change the said meter of the complainant with a new one and to check the same as per the rules of the opposite parties. It is further submitted that the said meter has been installed by the opposite parties outside the house of the complainant. The opposite party No. 1 avoided the complainant on one pretext or the other and ultimately refused to accede the request of the complainant. This act of the opposite parties amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.

Relief.-

The opposite parties may be directed to.-

1) Withdraw the bill dated 6.3.2017 or refund the amount deposited if any against the said bill alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of deposit till realization and overhaul the bill in dispute as per the PSPCL Rules.

2) Pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment.

3) Pay Rs. 10,000/- on account of litigation expenses.

3. Upon notice of this complaint the opposite parties filed the written version taking legal objections on the grounds that the complaint is bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties. Further, the complainant is estopped from filing the present complaint. Further, this Forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint.

4. On merits, it is submitted that the bill in respect of electricity consumed by the complainant has been issued by the opposite parties. It is denied that the complainant ever approached opposite party No. 1 as alleged for any alleged checking of his meter and for correction of the bill amount or requested opposite party No. 1 to change the said meter of the complainant with new one and further to check the same as per rules of the opposite parties. It is also denied if opposite party No. 1 ever avoided the complainant or refused to accede his request. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant never contacted the opposite parties as alleged. Lastly, they prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint with costs.

5. In order to prove his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of bill Ex.C-2 and evidence of complainant was closed by order of this Forum dated 11.8.2017.

6. To rebut the case of the complainant, the opposite parties tendered in evidence details of last four months Ex.OP-1.2.3/1, copy of ledger Ex.OP-1.2.3/2, affidavit of Navneet Kumar Ex.OP-1.2.3/3 and closed the evidence.

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file. Written arguments also filed by both the parties.

8. As per Ex.C-2 i.e. bill of dated 6.3.2017 consumption of electricity is total 3751 units. As per Ex.OP-1.2.3/2 Old reading is 12400 and New reading is 16151 so total consumption of units is 3751. As per Ex.OP-1.2.3/1 consumption of four months has shown by opposite parties. But Ex.C-2 i.e. bill of complainant of dated 6.3.2017 is for consumption of units 3751 and on this bill in the column of Miscellaneous charges consumption of 6 months have shown. Contrary to it on Ex.OP-1.2.3/1 brought on record by opposite parties which is only for consumption of four months and consumption of meter reading which is mentioned on Ex.OP-1.2.3/1 is differ from the column titled as Miscellaneous charges of Ex.C-2. It is also very astonished fact that according to copy of ledger Ex.OP-1.2.3/2 which is concerned with Account of complainant i.e. L62GT620016H is differ in regard of consumption of previous months from the consumption of six months which is mentioned in Ex.C-2 in column of Miscellaneous charges. So, this Forum gives directions to the opposite parties to make correction in Ex.C-2 which is bill of dated 6.3.2017. Furthermore, it is also directed by this Forum to the opposite parties to refund the excess amount, if any after making correction in the bill dated 6.3.2017.

9. In view of the above discussion present complaint is allowed and opposite parties are directed to make correction in the bill dated 6.3.2017 and refund the excess amount, if any, after making correction in the bill dated 6.3.2017. The opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs. 2,000/- to the complainant as compensation for mental tension and harassment. Compliance of the order be made within the period of 30 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the records.

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN FORUM:

9th Day of March 2018


 


 


 

(Sukhpal Singh Gill)

President


 


 

(Vandna Sidhu) Member

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sukhpal Singh Gill]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MS. MS. VANDNA SIDHU]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.