BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.
Complaint Case No.22 of 2019.
Date of institution: 24.01.2019.
Date of decision:16.12.2019.
Nitu S/o Sh. Om Parkash R/o VPO Siwan, Tehsil Siwan, District Kaithal.
…Complainant.
Versus
S.D.O. Op. Sub Division, UHBVN, Siwan, Distt. Kaithal.
….Respondent.
Before: Sh. D.N.Arora, President.
Sh. Rajbir Singh, Member.
Smt. Suman Rana, Member.
Present: Sh. Sanjeev Saini, Advocate, for the complainant.
Sh. Ramesh Rana, Advocate for the OP.
ORDER
D.N.ARORA, PRESIDENT
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that the complainant is having domestic electricity connection No.SW01-4100-L and has been paying the bills regularly. It is alleged that the Op has issued a bill No.06956 dt. 11.12.2018 amounting to Rs.3529/- to the complainant in which the reading is shown as 895 units (old reading) and 1026 units (new reading) and units consumed have been shown as 131 units. It is further alleged that as per domestic category tariff schedule is at the rate of Rs.4.50 per unit for the units 0 to 151 units, while the complainant has consumed only 131 units and amounts to be paid of 131 units comes to Rs.549.50 paise. The complainant requested the Op several times to correct the bill amount but the Op did not resolve the grievances of complainant. So, it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of Op and prayed for acceptance of complaint. Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, the OP appeared before this Forum and contested the complaint by filing their reply raising preliminary objections with regard to locus-standi; maintainability; cause of action; jurisdiction; that the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum. The true facts are that before the issuance of bill of December, 2018 for the amount of Rs.3529/-, the complainant was in arrear/defaulter of bill of October/2018 for the total amount of Rs.3018/- INR. Thereafter, the bill for the month of December, 2018 was issued which included Rs.3018/- INR as previous balance of bill of October, 2018 plus bill of 131 as consumed units. The complainant is defaulter of UHBVN of pending bills and all the bills are issued to the complainant as per the norms of UHBVN; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of Op. On merits, the objections raised in the preliminary objections are reiterated and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.
3. The complainant tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Annexure-C1 to Annexure-C11 and thereafter, closed the evidence.
4. On the other hand, the Op tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.RW1/A and document Annexure-R1 and thereafter, closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the learned Counsel for both the parties and perused the record carefully.
6. Undisputedly, the complainant is having domestic electricity connection No.SW01-4100-L. According to the complainant, the Op issued a bill No.06956 dt. 11.12.2018 amounting to Rs.3529/- Annexure-C8 to the complainant in which the reading is shown as 895 units (old reading) and 1026 units (new reading) and units consumed have been shown as 131 units. The complainant contended that as per domestic category tariff schedule is at the rate of Rs.4.50 per unit for the units 0 to 151 units, while the complainant has consumed only 131 units and amounts to be paid of 131 units comes to Rs.549.50 paise. The complainant requested the Op several times to correct the bill amount but the Op did not resolve the grievances of complainant.
7. We have considered the rival contentions of both the parties. The only dispute between the parties is regarding the bill No.06956 dt. 11.12.2018 amounting to Rs.3529/- Annexure-C8. At the time of arguments, ld. Counsel for the Op has placed on record copy of abstract of ledger (consumption data) bearing account No.SW01-4100-L. We have perused the above-said consumption data/abstract of ledger. The Op has placed on file the detail of tariff and they have taken into consideration the tariff rate from the period 2/2018 to 10/2019 and taken the average bi-monthly basis and they have already charged the amount of Rs.6884/- as per Annexure-R1 and the amount of Rs.6265/- was to be chargeable and now they will adjust the amount of Rs.619/- as difference of the already charged amount i.e. Rs.6884/- less Rs.6265/- as chargeable amount. We have also perused the above-said consumption data (abstract of ledger). The Op has added the surcharge from the period 2/2018 to 10/2019 which is not legal one. The Op cannot charge the surcharge when they have prepared the new consumption data/billing. Hence, the surcharge from the period 2/2018 to 10/2019 which comes to Rs.874/- is not payable by the complainant. In this way, the Op is negligent upon his duties and the complainant was forced to file the present complaint, so, the complainant is entitled for cost of proceedings.
7. Thus, as a sequel of above discussion, we allow the present complaint partly. The Op is directed to adjust the amount of Rs.619/- as tariff different as-well-as Rs.874/- as surcharge (mentioned above) in the future bills of complainant. The Op is also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation charges. The above-said costs of Rs.2,000/- will also be adjusted by the Ops in the future bills of complainant. A copy of said order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to record-room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
Dt.:16.12.2019.
(D.N.Arora)
President.
(Suman Rana), (Rajbir Singh)
Member Member.
