Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/20/51

Harbans Lal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Limited - Opp.Party(s)

S.P.Sharma Adv.

31 Aug 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No: 51 dated 06.02.2020.                                                Date of decision: 31.08.2022.

 

Harbans Lal, aged about 75 years S/o. Sh. Ram Dass Khanna, Resident of H. No.3913, Street No.11, New Madhopuri, Ludhiana.                                                                                                                      ..…Complainant 

•  

1. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., The Mall, Patiala, through its Chairman/Managing Director.
2. Senior Executive Engineer (XEN), Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd., Sub-Division Unit No.1, Kakowal Road, Division, Ludhiana.                                                                                          …..Opposite parties 

          Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

QUORUM:

SH. K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

SH. JASWINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant             :         None.

For OPs                          :         Sh. Yash Paul, Advocate.

 

ORDER

PER K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

1.                In brief, the case of the complainant is that the complainant along with his wife Swarna Rani is residing in house No.3913, New Madhopuri, Ludhiana whereas 3 phase electric connection bearing account No.3002806888 stands installed for the last 15 years. The complainant has been making the payment of the consumption bills in respect of the said account regularly. The complainant has two sons namely Rakesh Khanna and Ajay Kumar who were earlier residing with him and of late they have started residing separately from the complainant in a separate accommodation. The sons of the complainant applied for electric connection in their separate accommodation and the OPs installed a separate meter in the name of  Ajay Kumar vide consumer account No.3001715655. Another meter was installed in the name of Rakesh Khanna bearing consumer account No.0001791356. The sons of the complainant have also been regularly paying the consumption charges. However, the electric meter of Ajay Kumar was disconnected by the OPs in the month of November 2018 and that of Rakesh Khanna was disconnected prior to that in March 2018. The said meters were disconnected due to non-payment of electricity charges. The complainant received bill dated 30.12.2019 amounting to Rs.1,48,020/- which included arrears of Rs.18,321/- and Rs.1,84,916/- reflected as sundry charges. After receiving the bill, the complainant approached the OPs for the correction of the bills. Instead of correcting the bill, the OPs started threatening that in case the payment is not deposited, the electric connection of the complainant would be disconnected. In the month of January 2020, the complainant again received a bill of Rs.1,48,020/- wherein also sundry charges had been included. On the request of the complainant, the OPs refused to withdraw the said bills and threatened to disconnect the connection if the amount was not deposited. The complainant has never consumed that much energy which could justify the issuance of such an exorbitant bill. The complainant has never been in arrears of any electricity dues. The Ops did not deliver the details of the amount demanded in the bill. This amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the OPs. In the end, it has been requested that the demand of Rs.1,24,916/- as sundry charges and total amount of Rs.1,48,020/- as arrears of account No.3002806888  may be quashed being illegal, null and arbitrary and the OPs be restrained from disconnecting the electricity connection of the complainant and further the OPs be made to pay a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.15,000/-.

2.                The complaint has been resisted by the OPs. In the written statement filed on behalf of the OPs, it has been, inter alia, pleaded that the complaint is not maintainable and there has been no deficiency of service on the part of the OPs. According to the OPs, on 19.11.2019, the officials of the OPs checked the premises of the electric account No.3001715655 and was removed due to non-payment of energy charges. The second meter bearing No.GT41/894 was still installed and the disputed amount of Rs.1,23,030/- was required to be transferred to the account No.GT41/894. Accordingly the OPs deducted the defaulting amount of Rs.1,24,900/- from Ajay Kumar and transferred the same in the account of the complainant. It is further pleaded that the officials of the OPs namely Sushil Kumar AEE (Tech.) checked the premises of the complainant on 20.11.2020 and found that there were three portions in the premises i.e. ground floor, first floor and second floor. It was further found that earlier there was a meter in the name of Ajay Kumar which was removed due to default in payment of bills and the amount was transferred to the second meter which has been installed in the name of the complainant. It has further been reported that at present one meter bearing No.3002806888 which is in the name of the complainant and all the three portions of the house were using the electricity from the same meter. It was further reported that all the family members were present in the premises but have refused to disclose their names and sign the checking report. The complainant and his family members are using the one connection which is running in the name of the complainant. It is the duty of the complainant to pay the amount pertaining to the account of his son Ajay Kumar as they are living as one family. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied as wrong and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has also been made.

3.                The complainant has not formally tendered any evidence but affidavit Ex. CA along with documents Ex. C1 and Ex. C2 were attached with the complaint.

4.                On the other hand, the counsel for OPs tendered affidavit Ex. RA of Er. Baljinder Singh Sidhu, Additional Superintending Engineer of the OPs along with documents Ex. R1 to Ex. R6 and closed the evidence.

5.                None has been appearing in this case on behalf of the complainant since 21.01.2022. We have heard the counsel for the OPs and gone through the record. We proceed to decide the case on merits.

6.                By way of this complaint, the complainant has challenged the demand of Rs.1,24,916/- on account of sundry charges in the bill for December 2019 as illegal. The bill for the month of December 2019 is Ex. C1 on the file. In this regard, Er. Baljinder Singh Sidhu, Additional Superintending Engineer in his affidavit Ex. RA has categorically stated that Sushil Kumar AEE (Tech) checked the premises of the complainant on 20.11.2020 and found that there are three portions of the house of the complainant i.e. ground floor, first floor and second floor. He further found that only one meter bearing account No.3002806888 stands installed in the premises of the complainant and all the three floors were using the electricity from the meter which is installed in the name of the complainant. The other meter in the name of Ajay Kumar had already been removed as he defaulted in payment of electricity consumption charges. It was further found during the checking that the entire family members were present but they refused to sign. It was also found that all the family members were using only one connection which is installed in the name of the complainant. In this regard, the OPs have placed on record the report Ex. R6 wherein all these facts have been clearly mentioned. In these circumstances, considering the fact that only one connection is installed in the premises of the complainant from where the entire family of the complainant is using the electricity and the other connection in the name of Ajay Kumar son of the complainant was disconnected due to non-payment of energy charges. In these circumstances, as a matter of equity when the family of the complainant is using the energy, the complainant is bound to pay the electricity bill. Though the complainant has claimed that his sons are residing separately but in the report Ex. R6, it is clearly mentioned that the entire family is residing in the same building and drawing the electricity from the same meter. The matter would have been different had the sons of the complainant living in a separate building. Moreover, it is also not the case of the complainant that the meter installed in his premises is defective or displaying/recording higher energy than is being used nor any request for checking accuracy of the meter has been given by the complainant. In these circumstances, the complainant cannot be heard harping that he is not bound to pay excess charges when it has come in evidence that the entire family is drawing and using the electricity from the meter installed in his name. Under the circumstances, it cannot be said that there has been any deficiency of service on the part of the OPs.

7.                As a result of above discussion, the complaint fails and the same is hereby dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

8.                Due to rush of work and spread of COVID-19, the case could not be decided within statutory period.

 

                             (Jaswinder Singh)                            (K.K. Kareer)

                    Member                                           President

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:31.08.2022.

Gobind Ram.

Harbans Singh Vs Punjab State Power Corp. Ltd.                               CC/20/51

Present:       None for the complainant.

                   Sh. Yash Paul, Advocate for the OPs.

 

                   Arguments heard. Vide separate detailed order of today, the complaint fails and the same is hereby dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

                             (Jaswinder Singh)                            (K.K. Kareer)

                    Member                                           President

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:31.08.2022.

Gobind Ram.