Punjab

Nawanshahr

CC/65/2016

Manmohan Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

PSPCL - Opp.Party(s)

22 May 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SHAHEED BHAGAT SINGH NAGAR.

                  

                     Consumer Complaint No.  65 of 25.07.2016

                      Date of Decision             :   22.05.2017

 

 

Manmohan Singh S/o Malkit Singh, Village & Post Office Langroya, Tehsil and District Nawanshahr.                                                                                                                                     ….Complainant

Versus

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Garhshankar Road Nawanshahr through Sub Divisional Officer.
2. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Garhshankar Road Nawanshahr through XEN.
3. Head Office, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Mall Road, Patiala through Chairman.

                                                                    ….Opposite Parties

                   Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

ARGUED BY:

For complainant            :         In person.

For OPs                         :         Sh.S.S. Garcha, Advocate

 

QUORUM:

S.KARNAIL SINGH, PRESIDENT

S.KANWALJEET SINGH, MEMBER

 

 ORDER

S.KARNAIL SINGH, PRESIDENT

 

1. This complaint has been filed by complainant wherein it is stated that he is permanent consumer of the OPs and having consumer account No.N44LG401138H.   The consumption of the electric meter of the complainant since August 2015 is as under:-

 

 

Bill Date	Reading		Consumption	Total Bill	Meter Status	Bill Type	Previous Year arrear/sundry charges
	New	Old
10.08.15	6339	5905	434	2620	O	OK	0
29.09.15	6339	6339	000	190	O	MMC	0
01.12.15	6339	6339	000	100	O	MMC	0
31.01.16	0	6339	102	560	O	Average	0
01.04.16	52	01	122	670	C	Average	0
31.05.16	386	52	386	2010	O	OK	0

 

2. He is regularly paying electricity bills, and nothing is due against him.  The OP-1 send show cause notice dated 18.07.2016 whereby demanded a sum of Rs.4,122/- as arrear of defective meter from July 2015 to November 2015.  In the aforesaid four bills, the status of meter has shown “OK”, but despite “OK” Status the OP used to send the electricity charges on the basis of MMC or average.  The complainant has already paid bill of Rs.2620/- for the period 12.06.2015 to 10.08.2015.  Despite that the previous balance has been added in the electricity bill of July.  When the complainant alleged that he and his wife were not residing in the house from 18.08.2015 to 25.01.2016 and house was locked and electricity was not consumed.  The complainant number of time requested the OPs to correct the bill and withdraw the notice but they are adamant and rather they threatened the complainant that if he failed to deposit the said amount, then the electric meter will be removed and as such necessity has arisen to the complainant to file the present complaint with the prayer that complaint of the complainant may be accepted and average charges for the consumption on the basis of defective meter i.e. of Rs.4122/- be set aside.  Further, the OPs be directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- for mental harassment and agony and Rs.30,000/- as litigation expenses. 
3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, who filed joint reply and contested the same by taking preliminary objections that complaint of the complainant is not maintainable as the bill of the complainant can be revised as per law and further alleged that non-functional meter, short assessment of electric charges, if there is short assessment of the bill for a long period, bills can be revised for that period but limiting to twelve months.  On merits, it is admitted that electric connection was installed in the house of the complainant and remaining allegations are categorically denied and further alleged that account of the complainant is revised by internal audit party due to non functional of meter from 7/15 to 11/15 and charged Rs.4152/-.  Bill - cum - show cause notice was served to complainant and he was asked to deposit the revised bill of Rs.4152/- and lastly prayed that complaint of the complainant is without merits and same may be dismissed.
4. In order to prove the case, complainant himself has tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, bill – cum – show cause notice Ex.C-1, copy of electricity bills Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-3 and closed the evidence.
5. Similarly, the counsel for the OPs has tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Arun Sheikhar, SDO Ex.OP/A and further tendered photocopies of some documents as Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-4 and closed the evidence.
6. We have heard the complainant in person and counsel for the OPs and scanned the case file very minutely.
7. In nutshell, the complainant alleged that OP has served show cause notice whereby OPs demanded the arrear of electricity consumption for July 2015 to November 2015 for Rs.4122/- when the meter of the complainant remained defective, but complainant alleged that status of the meter between July 2015 to November 2015 was shown “OK”. Therefore, the said arrear is illegal and without any reason.
8. To the contrary, the version of the OPs is that the meter of the complainant was defective and non-functional and average bill was sent to the complainant as per report of internal audit party.  The audit party revised the electricity consumption of the complainant from 7/15 to 11/15 and as such show cause notice was served on complainant to deposit an amount of Rs.4152/-.
9. We find that version of the OP is that meter of the complainant was defective and same was changed and sent to ME Lab Goraya, and as per report of the ME Lab Goraya, the meter of the complainant was found dead.  The report of ME Lab is Ex.OP-2. Accordingly the account of the complainant was overhauled and then notice Ex.OP-4 was served on complainant and he was asked to deposit Rs.4152/-. We find that the electric meter was not changed in the presence of the complainant nor it was packed and sealed in the presence of the complainant and even OP has itself violated the Rules and Regulations of the OPs by not serving the complainant at the time of checking of the meter in the ME Lab. If so, then the report of the ME Lab is not binding upon the complainant. As per electricity bill Ex.C-3 dated 10.08.2015, the status of the meter is “OK” and consumption charges have been shown as Rs.2668/-.  The consumption charges for the month of July 2015 to November 2015 has not been brought on the file for the best known reasons.  So under these circumstances, it is clear that OPs have imposed the amount of Rs.4152/- by way of show cause notice to the complainant against rules and regulation.  Therefore, the said show cause notice Ex.C-1 is liable to be set aside.         
10.  In the light of above detailed discussion, the complaint of complainant is partly accepted and show cause notice Ex.C-1 for recovery of Rs.4122/- is set aside and OPs are directed to recover only consumption charges from the complainant for that period.  The OPs are further directed to pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- for mental harassment and Rs.1,000/- as litigation expenses.
11. Entire compliance of aforesaid order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
12. Complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
13. Copies of the order be sent to the parties, as permissible, under the rules.

Dated 22.05.2017                                                         

 

 

(Kanwaljeet Singh)                (Karnail Singh)

Member                                  President