DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FOR`UM, BATHINDA.

CC.No.330 of 13-07-2012

Decided on 05-11-2012

Vimla Devi aged about 48 years w/o Rakesh Kumar r/o Kothi No.21, Veer Colony, Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

1.Punjab State Power Corporation Lmt., The Mall Patiala, through its Secretary/Chairman.

2.S.D.O/AEE,Punjab State Power Corporation Lmt., City Sub Division, Bathinda.

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.

Sh.Amarjeet Paul, Member.

Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member.

Present:-

For the Complainant: Sh.Ashok Gupta, counsel for the complainant.

For Opposite parties: Sh.Charan Singh, counsel for opposite parties.

ORDER

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is holding an electric connection bearing No.B13PT660387Y and there is nothing due towards him. There are many officials including J.Es. Meter Reader and Meter Inspector etc. to check the working of the meter in routine and if there is any defect in the meter/metering equipment then the officials are duty bound to change the meter or remove the defect or to inform the higher officials and if defect is not removed then consumer is not bound to make the payment. The opposite parties are duty bound to install the correct and accurate meter and condition of the meter is to be shown to the consumer at the time of the installation or removal when the defect occurs. The complainant has purchased the house in November, 2011. The meter of the complainant was not displaying the reading and there was D code. The complainant got bills dated 4.3.2012 of Rs.4690/- and 4.5.2012 of Rs.6900/- and both the bills were paid though the bills were very excessive. In May 2012 meter No.853813 was removed and sent to the M.E lab in June 2012 where the said meter was declared defective. New meter was installed in May 2012 whose consumption was 117 units. The opposite parties issued a further bill dated 3.7.2012 of Rs.8010/- without any explanation. After getting the bills the complainant met the opposite parties and requested to give the detail about the bills of Rs.8000/-, Rs.6900/- and Rs.4690/-, but the opposite party No.2 did not respond the request rather threatened to disconnect the connection if the payment is not made. The complainant is still ready to make the current bill of 117 units but the opposite parties are not accepting the request nor giving any explanation about the alleged amount. The complainant never used the electricity in the reckless manner and it is not possible to issue the bill of Rs.8010/-. The complainant further alleged that he requested the opposite parties not to charge the amount of Rs.8010/- of bill dated 3.7.2012 as there is no possibility of the huge bill of the electricity and also requested to charge the bill as per the consumption but they flatly refused to accede his demand. The opposite parties were requested to refund Rs.6900/- and Rs.4690/- and to charge the bill on the basis of the load but they did not pay any heed to his requests. Hence the complainant has filed the present complaint for seeking the directions of this Forum to the opposite parties to quash the bill of Rs.8010/- dated 3.7.2012, to refund Rs.6900/- and Rs.4690/- and to charge the bill on the basis of the load alongwith cost and compensation.

2. The notice was sent to the opposite parties. The opposite parties after appearing before this Forum have filed their joint written statement and pleaded that the bills dated 4.3.2012, 4.5.2012 and 3.7.2012 were issued in the name of the consumer on the average basis keeping in view the consumption of the consumer during the last year as the said meter installed in the premises in question was defective. The opposite parties further pleaded that during the last year, the sanctioned load of the connection was 5.55 KW while at the time of issuing the bill in question, the load was got extended upto 8 KW as such the bill was issued for 1530 units accordingly keeping in view the extension of the load of the connection. The new meter has already been installed in the premises of the complainant.

3. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

4. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.

5. Admittedly, the connection bearing No.B13PT660387Y is installed in the premises of the complainant. The opposite parties have issued the bills dated 4.3.2012 of Rs.4690/- and 4.5.2012 of Rs.6900/- to the complainant.

6. The submissions of the complainant is that in November, 2011 his meter was not displaying the reading and there was 'D' code. He received the abovementioned two bills that were very excessive. In May, 2012 the meter No.853813 was removed and bill dated 3.7.2012 was issued to the complainant for Rs.8010/- for the consumption of 117 units. The complainant requested the opposite parties to provide the detail about the bills of Rs.8010/-, Rs.6900/- and Rs.4690/-, but no heed is paid to his request. The complainant further submitted that he is still ready to pay the the current bill of 117 units. The complainant has never used the electricity in the reckless manner and it is not possible to issue the bill of Rs.8010/-.

7. The opposite parties submitted that the bill dated 4.3.2012 and 4.5.2012 were issued in the name of the complainant on the average basis keeping in view the consumption of the consumer during the last year as the said meter installed in the premises in question was defective one. The said meter was removed and the opposite parties issued the bill dated 3.7.2012 for Rs.8010/-. The said demand raised by the opposite parties is send on the average basis keeping in view the consumption of the consumer during the last year as the said meter installed in the premises in question was defective one. During the last year the sanctioned load of the connection was 5.55 KW while at the time of issuing the bill in question the load was got extended upto 8 KW as such the bill was issued for 1530 units as per the extension of the load of the connection. The new meter has already been installed in the premises of the complainant.

8. The opposite parties have placed on file the consumption data Ex.R1 and a perusal of the same reveals that the said meter has been changed and the bill for the consumed units 1530 on the average consumption basis has been sent to the complainant, as the load was increased from 5.5 KW to 8 KW. Er.Sahil Gupta AE Commercial-II, SDO, PSPCL, Bathinda has deposed in his affidavit Ex.R2 that

'if the meter is tampered/burnt with by the consumer, thereby causing the defect in the meter, the consumer is liable to pay the penalty as per the Electricity Supply Code and Regulation 2007 of the Punjab State Electricity Board. The bills dated 4.3.2012 and 4.5.2012 were issued in the name of the consumer on the average basis keeping in view the consumption of the consumer during the last year as the said meter installed in the premises in question was defective. The said meter was removed and consumer was issued bill dated 3.7.2012 for Rs.8010/-. The said demand is raised by the opposite parties on the average basis keeping in view the consumption of the consumer during the last year as the said meter installed in the premises in question was defective. During the last year, the sanctioned load of the connection was 5.55 KW while at the time of issuing the bill in question, the load was got extended upto 8 KW as such the bill was issued for 1530 units accordingly keeping in view the extension of the load of the connection'.

The third bill for Rs.8010/- was also sent on the average basis but the difference of the extended load is also charged from the complainant according to his consumption of the last year. A perusal of Ex.C2 shows that the bill has been issued for Rs.8010/- and the new reading is shown as 117 units and the sanctioned load is 8 KW.

9. Thus from the facts, circumstances and evidence placed on file this Forum concludes that the first two bills that has been charged by the complainant are sent on the average basis and the load of the previous year as the meter was defective at that time and third bill was also sent on the average basis of the previous year and enhancement of the load of 5.55 KW to 8 KW.

From the perusal of the documents and evidence placed on file it is also concluded that the account of the complainant was overhauled as per the electricity supply and regulation 2007 (As notified by Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission vide notification No.PSERC/Secy./Regu.31 dated June 29, 2007 and published in Govt. of Punjab Gazette dated July 27, 2007):-

“21.4 Defective Meters:-

..........

(g) Overhauling of consumer accounts:-

(ii)The accounts of a consumer will be overhauled for the period a burnt meter remained at site and for the period of direct supply. On the basis of energy consumption of the corresponding period of the previous year after calibrating for the changes in load, if any. In case the average consumption for the corresponding period of the previous year is not available then the consumer will be tentatively billed for the consumption to be assessed in the manner indicated in para-4 of Annexure-8 and subsequently adjusted on the basis of actual consumption in the corresponding period of the succeeding year.”

10. Therefore in view what has been discussed above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint is dismissed without any order as to cost.

11. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced in open Forum:-

05-11-2012 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)

President

(Amarjeet Paul)

Member

(Sukhwinder Kaur)

Member