Order by:

Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President

1.       The complainant  has filed the instant complaint under section 35 of  the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 on the allegations that an electric connection bearing a/c no.3002667817 is in the name of the complainant. The complainant is paying consumption charges. The complainant is consumer opposite parties in respect of electric connection in dispute. Further alleges that at the very first instance the complainant received the bill dated 21.03.2020 in which the opposite parties has raised a demand of Rs.28,546/- vide sundry charges. The complainant deposited the actual consumption charges of the same, thereafter bill 23.05.2020, 23.07.2020, 18.09.2020 and 21.11.2020 were issued by the opposite parties in which the said demand was made by the opposite parties as arrears. The complainant visited the opposite parties for a number of times for detail of said amount raised in the aforesaid bills, but the opposite parties were lingered on the matter on the one pretext or the other. Thereafter, ultimately on 04.12.2020 written grievance was made by the complainant before opposite party which was duly received by the concerned officials of the opposite parties and actual consumption bill was deposited by the complainant as per direction of the opposite parties, but no detail was ever supplied to the complainant with regard to alleged demand of sundry charges/arrear. The opposite parties have issued the alleged bill of Rs.49,950/- to the complainant on 26.01.2021 and complainant has deposited the actual consumption charges of the said bill for Rs.14, 620/-. The complainant approached the opposite parties on 08.02.2021 and made his complaint before them in writing which was duly received by the concerned officials on 08.02.2021 in which the complainant demanded the detail of the alleged amount, raised by opposite parties. Further alleges that on 22.02.2021 vide memo no.164 issued by SDO, Sub Division, South Moga was issued to the complainant in which it was stated by the opposite parties that the meter of the complainant was found dead stop on 25.11.2018 and ‘D’ Code bill was issued and the said meter was changed on 10.12.2018 and account of the complainant was overhauled with effect from 03/2018 to 09/2018 with the previous year and an amount of Rs.28,546/- is outstanding against the complainant and complainant was duly informed on 26.08.2019. However, complainant has never received any kind of notice/memo with regard to the demand of alleged amount. The said meter was never changed, sealed, packed in the presence of the complainant which is clear cut violation of law. Further alleges that the said period for which the account of the complainant was overhauled the status of the meter was ‘OK’. It is clear cut violation of law and rules and regulations of PSPC Ltd. as laid down in Electricity Supply Code at Page no.85, para no.21. It is a matter of dismay and surprise that opposite parties have issued impugned bill demanding a sum of Rs.49,950/-. The alleged demand is altogether, illegal, unjust void at law and liable to be set aside due to the reason that no proper notice of any kind has been issued before imposing the said amount. The complainant has been condemned unheard. No opportunity has been granted to the complainant. Mandatory provision of Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. has been violated. The demand of the said arrear is mere a dictatorship, exparte without any thyme or reason. The complainant has never used the electricity to this extent. The opposite parties were asked many a times to admit the rightful claim of the complainant, but they refused to do so.  Vide instant complaint, complainant has sought the following reliefs:

a)       Opposite Parties may be directed to quash the illegal demand of Rs.49,950/- (Rs.14,614/- as actual consumption charges which has been deposited by the complainant and Rs. 35,339/- as un-paid arrears) as per alleged bill dated 26.01.2021 in respect of A/C No.3002667817.

b)      Opposite parties may be directed to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation on account of mental tension and deficient services.

c)       And any other relief to which this Hon’ble Consumer Commission, Moga may deem fit be granted in the interest of justice and equity.   

2.       Upon notice Opposite Parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing  the written version taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the present Complaint is not maintainable. The complainant is estopped to file the present complaint by his own act and conduct. Actually domestic electric connection no. F24VN110386P a/c No. 3002667817 is installed in the premises of complainant and sanctioned load of the same is 4.33 KW and the same is in the name of Vidya Sagar Sharma s/o Jyoti Ram R/o Backside Gita Bhawan, Gali No. 5, Vedant Nagar, Moga. On 19.09.2018 the said meter of complainant was found 'D' Code by the meter reader. Thereafter on 11.12.2018 the meter of the complainant was changed by the concerned JE vide MCO no. 100007131731 dt. 05.12.2018. Thereafter Internal Audit Party vide half margin No. 287 dated 09.07.2019 overhauled the account of complainant for the period of 5/18 to 9/18 on the basis of last year's consumption for the same period. At the time of removal of the meter vide MCO no. 100007131731 dt. 05.12.2018 meter reading was 39,029 units. That opposite party is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.28.546.00 from the complainant. So, complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed. Detail of demanded amount after deducting the charged amount is given below:-

Chargeable due amount

Month         Units                    FC     EC              SOP    ED+IDF    MT-CC

5/18            968             232    6206           6438     1159        148

7/18            1544           242    10414                 10656    1918        249

9/18            1162           222    7613           7835     1410        185

__________________________________________________________

                                                                   24929             4489       532    …(a)

_________________________________________________________

Already charged

Units           FC              EC              SOP            ED+IDF        MT+CC

94               232             459             689             125                 16

0                 242             0                 242             43                   5

1                 222             9                 241             41                   5

____________________________________________________________

                                                          1172           209                21  …(b)

_________________________________________________________

Amount (a-b)         23757                           4278        511   Total Rs.28,546.00

          Thereafter SDO, South Sub Division on 22.02.2021 vide memo no.164 complainant /consumer was asked to deposit 28,546.00 but as the complainant did not deposited the demanded amount and it was added in the subsequent bills as arrears. Further alleges that complainant was already informed about the above said amount vide letter no.1839 dt. 26.08.2019. So, complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed. Remaining facts mentioned in the complaint are also denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint was made.

3.       In order to  prove  his  case, the complainant has tendered into evidence  his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C9 and closed his evidence.

4.       On the other hand,  to rebut the evidence of the complainant,  Opposite Parties tendered into copies of documents Ex.OPs1 to Ex.OPs5, affidavit of Sh.Baljit Singh, S.D.O, PSPCL, South Sub Division, Moga Ex.OPs6 alongwith calculation Ex.OPs7  and closed the evidence on behalf of the Opposite Parties.

5.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and gone through the documents placed on record.

6.       During the course of arguments, both the ld.counsel for the Complainant as well as Opposite Parties have mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint as well as in written reply respectively. The main contention of the complainant is that the complainant has received bill dated 21.03.2020 in which the opposite parties has raised a demand of Rs.28,546/- vide sundry charges. The complainant deposited the actual consumption charges of the same, thereafter bill 23.05.2020, 23.07.2020, 18.09.2020 and 21.11.2020 were issued by the opposite parties in which the said demand was made by the opposite parties as arrears. The complainant approached the opposite parties on 08.02.2021 and made his complaint before them in writing, in which the complainant demanded the detail of the alleged amount, raised by opposite parties. On 22.02.2021 vide memo no.164 issued by SDO, Sub Division, South Moga was issued to the complainant in which it was stated by the opposite parties that the meter of the complainant was found dead stop on 25.11.2018 and ‘D’ Code bill was issued and the said meter was changed on 10.12.2018 and account of the was overhauled with effect from 03/2018 to 09/2018 with the previous year and an amount of Rs.28,546/- is outstanding against the complainant and complainant was duly informed on 26.08.2019. However, complainant has never received any kind of notice/memo with regard to the demand of alleged amount. Further alleges that the said period for which the account of the complainant was overhauled the status of the meter was ‘OK’. The alleged demand is altogether, illegal, unjust void at law and liable to be set aside. On the other hand, ld. counsel for the opposite parties has repelled the aforesaid contentions of ld. counsel for the complainant on the ground that the opposite parties PSPCL has already overhauled the account of the complainant and as such there is no grievances remains of the complainant with regard to the disputed amount. Perusal of the document Ex.OP7 clearly shows that account of the complainant has already been overhauled as per the regulations of PSPCL. This averment has also mentioned by the opposite parties in its written statement as well as duly sworn affidavit of Sh.Baljit Singh, SDO, South Sub Division, Moga. On the other hand, the complainant has not placed on record any iota of evidence to rebut that the opposite parties has wrongly overhauled the account of the complainant. Further vide letter dated 22.02.2021 Ex.OP5 complainant was also informed that his account has been overhauled, as his meter was found dead stop. As such, we are of the view that opposite parties has rightly and correctly overhauled the account of the complainant.

7.       Keeping in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we find no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and hence the instant complaint stands dismissed. Keeping in view of the peculiar circumstance of the case the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to record room after compliance.

8.     Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.

          This complaint could not be decided within the prescribed period because the State Government has not appointed any of the Whole Time Members in this Commission for about 3 years i.e. w.e.f. 15.09.2018 till 27.08.2021 as well as due to pandemic of COVID-19.

Announced in Open Commission.