ORAL

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

U.P., Lucknow.

Appeal No. 1768 of 2016

1- Chief Engineer, Pachimanchal Vidyut Vitran

    Nigam Ltd., RDC, Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad.

2- Executive Engineer, Electricity Urban Distribution

     Division, 6^th Vasundhara, Ghaziabad           ….Appellants. 

Versus

Smt. Omvati w/o Sri Sauraj, near Government

School, Kakkar Model, Ghaziabad.                ….Respondent.

Present:-

Hon’ble Justice Mr. Akhtar Husain Khan, President.

Mr. Isar Husain, Advocate for Appellants.

None appeared for respondent.

Date:  20.5.2019

JUDGMENT

          This is an appeal filed before State Commission under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against judgment and order dated 21.6.2016 passed by District Consumer Forum-II, Ghaziabad in complaint no.157 of 2014, Smt. Omvati vs. Chief Executive Engineer, Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. & anr. whereby District Consumer Forum has allowed complaint and passed order in Hindi which is extracted below:-

“परिवादिनी का परिवाद स्‍वीकार किया जाता है। विपक्षीगण को आदेशित किया जाता है कि इस निर्णय की दिनांक से एक माह के अंतर्गत वर्ष 2015 में जो विद्युत उपभोग परिवादिनी द्वारा किया गया है उसी के अनुरूप विवादित बिल के स्‍थान पर नया बिल के द्वारा विद्युत उपभोग की देयता की राशि विपक्षीगण द्वारा निर्धारित कर नया बिल जारी किया जाये। विवादित बिल दिनांक 03-02-2014 से 23-03-2014 का वास्‍ते अंकन 72,933/- रू0 निरस्‍त किया जाता है। मानसिक व आर्थिक क्षति में 10,000/- एवं वाद व्‍यय की मद में 5000/- रू0 अदा करें।

चूक  होने पर समस्‍त देय धनराशि पर परिवादिनी विपक्षीगण से 15 प्रतिशत दण्‍डात्‍मक वार्षिक ब्‍याज पाने की पात्र होगी। अतिरिक्‍त ब्‍याज की धनराशि परिवादिनी को भुगतान के पश्‍चात् विद्युत विभाग सम्‍बन्धित अधिशासी अभियन्‍ता के वेतन से बसूलेगा।”

          Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by District Consumer Forum, opposite parties of complaint have filed this appeal.

          Ld. Counsel Mr. Isar Husain appeared for appellants. Respondent did not turn out despite sufficient service of notice and none appeared for appellant.

          I have heard ld. Counsel for the appellants and perused impugned judgment and order as well as records.

(2)

          In brief, relevant facts for determination of appeal are that the respondent/complainant has filed complaint before District Consumer Forum-II, Ghaziabad wherein it has been stated that the complainant was making payment of electric bills regularly. Suddenly on 23.3.2014 the appellants/opposite parties served a bill of Rs.72,933.00 on respondent/ complainant whereas she has paid bills regularly. Respondent/complainant approached authorities of appellant and requested to cancel the bill issued by the appellants/ opposite parties but no relief was given to her. Consequently, respondent/complainant has filed complaint before the District Consumer Forum with prayer to cancel bill dated 23.3.2014 issued by the appellants/ opposite parties for Rs.72,933.00. Further relief of compensation for mental and physical harassment have sought alongwith cost of litigation.

           Appellants/opposite parties have filed written statement before the District Consumer Forum wherein it has been stated that respondent/complainant has paid bills for 4360 units only whereas the meter reading was showing that 17076 units have been consumed by respondent/complainant. Therefore, the bill in question has been sent by appellants/ opposite parties for remaining units to respondent/ complainant.

          In written statement, it has been stated that complaint has been filed with false allegation.

          After having gone through pleadings of the parties as well as evidence on record, the District Consumer Forum is of the view that bill dated 23.3.2014 issued by appellants/ opposite parties for Rs.72,933.00 against respondent/ complainant is liable to be cancelled. As such, the District Consumer Forum has allowed complaint and passed order which has been extracted above.

          It is contended by ld. Counsel for appellants that impugned judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum is against law as well as facts.

It is contended by ld. Counsel for appellants that  respondent/complainant has not challenged the meter reading of 17076 units. The District Consumer Forum has not considered this aspect of the case. The District Consumer Forum has passed impugned order without considering genuineness of meter reading. The impugned order should be set aside.

I have considered the submissions made by ld. Counsel for appellants.

(3)

Point for determination in this appeal is as to whether meter reading showing consumption of 17076 units is incorrect.

 Respondent/complainant has not challenged correctness of meter reading in complaint and has failed to show that alleged meter reading is incorrect. As such, the bill served by appellants to respondent/complainant for units consumed cannot be cancelled.

  In view of discussions made above, I am of the view that the impugned judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum is erroneous and is liable to be set aside.

In view of above, appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum is set aside.

Complaint is dismissed.

Parties shall bear their own costs.

Rs.7,750.00 deposited by appellants under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act in this appeal shall be refunded to appellants alongwith interest accrued.

 (Justice Akhtar Husain Khan)       

                                                              President                            

Jafri PA II

Court No.1