DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 374 of 10.9.2021

                                      Decided on: 17.1.2023

Rajinder Kaur aged about 34 years, daughter of Sh.Nirmal Singh, H.No.446/E1, Guru Nanakpura Mohalla, Nabha, District Patiala.               

                                                                             …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. ( Powercom), Head Office: The Mall, Patiala through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director.

2. S.D.O.,Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. (Powercom), Sub Division Nabha Tehsil Nabha and District Patiala.    

…………Opposite Parties

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act

QUORUM

                                      Sh. S.K.Aggarwal, President

                                      Sh.G.S.Nagi,Member    

ARGUED BY     

                                       Sh.D.S.Behgal,counsel for complainant.

                                      Ms. Anu Garg, counsel for OPs.

 ORDER

                                      S.K.AGGARWAL,PRESIDENT

1. The instant complaint is filed by Rajinder Kaur  (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the OP/s) under the Consumer Protection Act ( for short the Act).
2. It is averred that an electricity connection vide a/c No.3005247837 is installed at another premises of the complainant, situated at Mohalla Shivpuri, Nabha, purchased by her vide vasika No.2378 dated 21.11.2017 and is regulary paying the electricity bills and nothing is due towards her.
3. It is further averred that in the month of February,2021, complainant received letter dated 9.2.2021 issued by OP No.2, claiming therein that they are going to add a bill amount of Rs.10,527/- relating to meter No.3005247837, in the bill of the complainant. It is averred that the said meter is in the name of one Tarsem Sammi. It is further averred that in this regard complainant moved an application dated 31.3.2021 to SDO, PSPCL but no action was taken . The complainant did not pay the amount as the same pertains to one Tarsem Sammi, then the OPs disconnected the electricity connection. Then the complainant was forced to pay the amount of Rs.10,000/- on 28.8.2021 under protest. Thus, the OPs indulged in mal practice and unfair trade practice  which caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant. Consequently, prayer has, thus been made for acceptance of the complaint.
4. Upon notice, OPs appeared through counsel and filed their written statement raising various preliminary objections. On merits, it is admitted that a/c No. 3005247837 is in the name of complainant. It is also admitted that OP No.2 added a bill amount of Rs.10,580/- pending against A/c No.3000676357 to a/c No. 3005247837 because Tarsem Singh is residing in the house of complainant. It is submitted that shop of Tarsem Sammi was locked and consumer is residing in Shivpuri Colony,Nabha, which is house of complainant, who is consuming electricity a/c No. 3005247837 and have charged the amount legally. There is no mal practice or unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. After denying all other averments of the complainant, the OPs have prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
5. In support of the averments made in the complaint, ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence Ex.CA, affidavit of the complainant alongwith documents i.e. copy of sale deed,Ex.C1, copy of letter, Ex.C2, copy of application,Ex.C3, copies of bills,Exs.C4 to C6 and closed the evidence.
6. On the other hand, ld. counsel for OPs has tendered in evidence Ex.OP1 affidavit of Er.Mohinder Kumar, SDO, Ex.OP2 copy of LC report, Ex.OP3 copy of letter dated 1.3.2021 and closed the evidence.
7. We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
8. Admittedly, complainant is a consumer of OPs having a domestic connection bearing No. 3005247837 and has been paying the bills issued by the OPs, regularly. The complainant was issued a notice vide memo No.2998 dated 1.3.2021, Ex.OP3, wherein a demand of Rs.10580/- was raised by the OPs, on account of dues outstanding against a/c No.3000676357. This amount was then charged in the running energy bill of the complainant, as sundry charges. The complainant then moved a representation, Ex.C3, to the OPs that the amount charged is illegal and may be withdrawn. However, no action  for withdrawal of the amount was taken by the OPs and instead they threatened to disconnect the connection, if the amount was not paid.The complainant deposited an amount of Rs.10,000/- on 28.8.2021 vide Ex.C6 to avoid disconnection.
9. The ld. counsel for the OPs has relied upon checking report, Ex.OP2 conducted by JE, wherein it has been reported to charge the disputed amount of Rs.10,527/- pertaining to Tarsem Sammi having a/c No.3000676357, which was in operation in his shop was harged to the complainant having connection No. 3005247837 , installed in her house.
10. A perusal of the checking report, indicates that the complainant is residing in another premises and has no relation to said Tarsem Sammi having connection No.3000676357 installed in another premises.As such the amount has been charged illegally to the complainant in violation of Regulation No.30.15 of Supply Code,2014,framed by Punjab Electricity Commission, exercising the power conferred under Section 181 read with various other sections of Electricity Act-2003 read with Electricity Amendment Act (No.2608 of 2007),which states as under:

“In case of transfer of property by sale/inheritance, the purchaser/heir shall be liable to pay all charges due with respect to such property and found subsequently recoverable from the consumer.”

It is clear from the above regulation that the amount can be charged to and recovered only from the premises where it was due.

11. In view of above discussion, we are of the opinion that the amount of Rs.10527/- charged to the complainant is against the rules and regulations and the action of the OPs in charging the same to the complainant and thereby threatening to disconnect the supply on account of non-payment is arbitrary and illegal. The complaint is accordingly partly allowed and the demand so raised vide notice dated 1.3.2021 is quashed. The OPs are also directed to refund Rs.10,000/-, paid by the complainant to avoid disconnection of her connection. The OPs are further directed to pay Rs.2000/- as compensation for causing harassment and mental agony to the complainant.
12. Compliance of the aforesaid order be made by the OPs, within 30 days from the date of the receipt of certified copy of this order.  
13. The instant complaint could not be disposed of within stipulated period due to heavy rush of work, Covid protocol and for want of Quorum from long time.
85109252238716.  
85109252238717.  

                                              G.S.Nagi                           S.K.AGGARWAL

                                              Member                          President