Order by:
Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President
1. This Consumer Complaint has been received by transfer vide order dated 26.11.2021 of Hon’ble President, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab at Chandigarh under section 48 of CPA Act, vide letter No.04/22/2021/4 C.P.A/38 dated 17.1.2022 from District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana to District Consumer Commission, Moga to decide the same in Camp Court at Ludhiana and said order was ordered to be affected from 14th March, 2022.
2. The complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (now section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019) on the allegations that the electricity connection bearing account no.3001824852 lying installed at Plot No.24, Gali No. Zeero, Hira Nagar, Ludhiana in the name of Gangadin, who sold the aforesaid property to the complainant vide agreement and delivered its physical possession to the complainant. The complainant is actual consumer vide electricity connection bearing account no.3001824852 lying installed at plot no.24, Gali No Zeero, Hira Nagar, Ludhiana and had been regularly consuming the electricity and was making the payment of electricity consumption to the department without any delay or default. All of sudden the complainant received bill dated 8.7.2016 for Rs.20,228/- from the opposite parties and the same is payable by 25.7.2016. The demand of the opposite party for Rs.20,208/- is quite illegal, malafide, ultra virus, wrong, improper and is against the principles of natural justice and the same is liable to be set-aside. After receiving the bill the complainant approached and apprised the opposite party no.1 that the complainant had been receiving bills for the last six months ranging between Rs.1000/- to Rs.3500/- after two months and requested the opposite party no.1 for redressal of her grievance vide letter dated 15.07.2016. The opposite party no.1 appointed Sh.Ashwani Kumar, Junior Engineer to check and verify the electricity meter. The said official checked the electricity meter in question on 15.7.2016 and submitted his report to the opposite party no.1 wherein he mentioned that the electricity meter lying installed in the name of the complainant is running fast. The opposite party no.1 directed the complainant to deposit fee for checking the meter and accordingly the said meter was challenged by the complainant by depositing the requisite fee of Rs.120/- with the department. The complainant received phone call to appear before the ME Lab and accordingly the complainant appeared and the official of the ME Lab obtained the signature of the complainant and orally told the complainant that the meter is running fast. The complainant approached the opposite party on 4.8.2016 and at that time the opposite party no.1 directed the complainant to deposit 20% of the bill amount and to challenge the demand before the Disputes Settlement Committee and accordingly the complainant deposited Rs.4500/- with the department and put his case before the Disputes Settlement Committee, but the Dispute Settlement Committee took the signatures of the complainant, but nothing positive had been done in this regard. The opposite parties miserably failed to redress the grievance of the complainant and they are deficient in rendering services to the complainant, rather they threatened to disconnect the electricity connection if the complainant failed to deposit the said amount and under the compelling circumstances the complainant had to deposit Rs.18,640/- with the department to save her electricity connection. The complainant is ready to pay the bill as per the consumption data of six month prior to the date of issuance of the bill and that amount can be adjusted out of Rs.23,145/- which the opposite parties have recovered from the complainant under threat of disconnection of the electricity connection. Hence the complainant has suffered mental pain and agony on account of deficiency in service of the opposite parties. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.
a) Opposite parties may be directed to adjust the bill amount out of Rs.23,145/- and to refund the remaining amount alongwith interest @ 12% p.a from the date of deposit till actual payment.
b) Opposite parties may also be directed to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation on account of mental pain and agony and to pay Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
c) And any other additional or alternative relief to which this District Consumer Commission deems fit be granted.
3. Opposite Parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing the written version taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint. The electric connection bearing account no.3001824852 is running in the name of Ganga Din. There is no privity of contract in between the parties of the present complaint as such the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed. This complaint is not maintainable and merits dismissal. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. In this case, the opposite parties rightly issued the bill dated 8.7.2016 for the amount of Rs.21,140/- to the consumer. But instead of depositing the amount, the husband of the complainant moved an application on 15.7.2016 before the opposite party no.1 for checking the accuracy of the meter and to change the same. Accordingly Ashwani Kumar JE of the opposite party no.1 checked the premises of the complainant and he reported that 1 phase meter was checked on the request of the complainant. He further reported that on putting the load the pulse of the meter is blinking. He further reported that the consumer wants to challenge the meter. He further reported that the challenge fee will be deposited by the consumer and remarks be taken from the ME Lab. At the time of checking, the said JE noted the reading of the disputed meter is 07444. Jasvinder Singh husband of the complainant signed the checking report after admitted the same as correct. Accordingly on the basis of the request of the complainant, the complainant deposited Rs.120/- as meter challenge fee, thereafter the meter was sent to the ME Lab for its internal checking and its accuracy. In the ME Lab, the officials of the ME Lab checked the changed meter as per rules and regulations of the Power com. On 4.8.2016 the complainant made a request to refer his case to DSC as the complainant was not satisfied with the report of ME Lab. Accordingly on the request of the complainant, the case of the complainant was referred to the DSC subject to the deposit of 20% of disputed amount and accordingly the complainant deposited the amount of Rs.4500/- with the opposite parties. The DSC after hearing both the parties decided the matter in favour of the opposite parties and thereafter the complainant deposited the remaining amount after admitting his liability without any protest. Since demand is legal and genuine and is relating to the regular consumption charges as such the complainant is not entitled for any relief. On merits, it is admitted to the extent that the electric account no.3002824852 is running in the name of Ganga Din. It is further submitted that the opposite party no.1 rightly issued the bill dated 8.7.2016 for the amount of Rs.21,140/- to the consumer as energy bill against the consumption consumed by the consumer. The demand of the bill is legal and genuine. It is further submitted that the husband of the complainant moved an application to check the accuracy of the meter and changed the same. Accordingly Ashwani Kumar JE of the opposite party no.1 checked the premises of the complainant and reported that the meter of the consumer was blinking on putting the load, but the complainant wants to challenge the said meter in the ME Lab. The said JE never mentioned that the meter of the consumer is running fast as alleged. In the ME Lab, officials of the ME Lab rightly checked/tested the meter of the complainant as per rules and regulations of the power com. Remaining facts mentioned in the complaint are also denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint was made.
4. In order to prove his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CA alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C3 and another affidavit of Sh.Jasvinder Singh s/o Late S.Darshan Singh Ex.CW2 and closed his evidence.
5. On the other hand, to rebut the evidence of the complainant, Opposite Parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Er.Sukhbir singh, Senior Executive Engineer, CMC Division (Special), PSPCL, Ludhiana as Ex.RA alongwith copies of documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R5 and closed the evidence on behalf of the Opposite Parties.
6. We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and gone through the evidence on record.
7. From the appraisal of the evidence on record, it becomes evident that the electricity bearing account no.3001824852 lying installed at Plot No.24, Gali No. Zeero, Hira Nagar, Ludhiana was lying installed in the name of Gangadin, who sold the aforesaid property to the complainant vide agreement and delivered its physical possession to the complainant. The complainant is actual consumer vide electricity connection bearing account no.3001824852 lying installed at plot no.24, Gali no.Zeero, Hira Nagar, Ludhiana and had been regularly consuming the electricity and had been regularly making the payment of electricity consumption to the department without any delay or default. All of sudden the complainant received bill dated 8.7.2016 for Rs.20,228/- from the opposite parties and the same is payable by 25.7.2016. After receiving the bill the complainant approached and apprised the opposite party no.1 that the complainant had been receiving bills for the last six months ranging between Rs.1000/- to Rs.3500/- for two months and requested the opposite party no.1 for redressal of her grievance vide letter dated 15.07.2016. The opposite party no.1 appointed Sh.Ashwani Kumar, Junior Engineer to check and verify the electricity meter. The said official checked the electricity meter in question on 15.7.2016 and submitted his report to the opposite party no.1 wherein he mentioned that the electricity meter lying installed in the name of the complainant is running fast. The opposite party no.1 directed the complainant to deposit fee for checking the meter and accordingly the said meter was challenged by the complainant by depositing the requisite fee of Rs.120/- with the department. The complainant received phone call to appear before the ME Lab and accordingly the complainant appeared and the official of the ME Lab obtained the signature of the complainant and orally told the complainant that the meter is running fast. The complainant approached the opposite party on 4.8.2016 and at that time the opposite party no.1 directed the complainant to deposit 20% of the bill amount and to challenge the demand before the Disputes Settlement Committee and accordingly the complainant deposited Rs.4500/- with the department and put his case before the Disputes Settlement Committee, but the Dispute Settlement Committee took the signatures of the complainant, but nothing positive has been done in this regard. The opposite parties miserably failed to redress the grievance of the complainant and they are deficient in rendering services to the complainant, rather they threatened to disconnect the electricity connection if the complainant failed to deposit the said amount and under the compelling circumstances the complainant had to deposit Rs.18,640/- with the department to save her electricity connection. So, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
8. On the other hand, ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties has repelled the aforesaid contention of the Complainant on the ground that the electric connection bearing account no.3001824852 is running in the name of Ganga Din. The opposite parties rightly issued the bill dated 8.7.2016 for the amount of Rs.21,140/- to the consumer. But instead of depositing the amount, the husband of the complainant moved an application on 15.7.2016 before the opposite party no.1 for checking the accuracy of the meter and to change the same. Accordingly Ashwani Kumar JE of the opposite party no.1 checked the premises of the complainant and he reported that 1 phase of the meter was checked on the request of the complainant. He further reported that on putting the load the pulse of the meter is blinking. He further reported that the consumer wants to challenge the meter. He further reported that the challenge fee will be deposited by the consumer and remarks be taken from the ME Lab. At the time of checking, the said JE noted the reading of the disputed meter is 07444. Jasvinder Singh husband of the complainant signed the checking report after admitted the same as correct. Accordingly on the basis of the request of the complainant, the complainant deposited Rs.120/- as meter challenge fee, thereafter the meter was sent to the ME Lab for its internal checking and its accuracy. In the ME Lab, the officials of the ME Lab checked the changed meter as per rules and regulations of the Power com. On 4.8.2016 the complainant made a request to refer his case to DSC as the complainant was not satisfied with the report of ME Lab. Accordingly on the request of the complainant the case of the complainant was referred to the DSC subject to the deposit of 20% of disputed amount and accordingly the complainant deposited the amount of Rs.4500/- with the opposite parties. The DSC after hearing both the parties decided the matter in favour of the opposite parties and thereafter the complainant deposited the remaining amount after admitting his liability without any protest. Since demand is legal and genuine and is relating to the regular consumption charges as such the complainant is not entitled for any relief. As such, there is no deficiency in service of the part of the opposite parties.
9. The Opposite Parties admitted in their written version as well as in duly sworn affidavit of Sh.Sukhir Singh, Senior Executive Engineer Ex.RA that the meter in dispute is OK, but as per the ME challan No.408 dated 02.08.2016 the meter was 14.12 % fast on 02.08.2016. On 08.07.2016, the bill for Rs.20,228/- payable on 25.07.2016 was sent and the complainant deposited meter challenge fee of Rs.120/-.
10. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the Opposite Parties that since the meter was running fast by 14.12%, so the account of the complainant be overhauled by overhauling with 14.12% fast running factor for the last six months prior to the date of challenge of meter and challenge fee deposited by the complainant is directed to be adjusted in his account and no late payment surcharge should be charged from the date of issuance of bill i.e. 08.07.2016 till the date of account is overhauled. The compliance of this order be made by Opposite Parties within 60 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this District Commission. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost by District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana and thereafter, the file be consigned to record room after compliance.
11. Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.
This Consumer Complaint was originally filed at District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (Now Commission) at Ludhiana and it keep pending over there until Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab vide letter No.04/22/2021/4 C.P.A/38 dated 17.1.2022 has transferred the instant Consumer Complaint alongwith Other Complaints to District Consumer Commission, Moga with directions to work on this file onward from 14th March, 2022 and accordingly District Consumer Commission, Moga has decided the present complaint at Camp Court, Ludhiana, as early as possible as it could decide the same
Announced in Open Commission at Camp Court, Ludhiana.
Dated: 28.06.2022.
