BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.
Complaint no.125/16.
Date of instt.: 10.05.2016.
Date of Decision: 10.01.2017.
Ram Niwas S/o Sh. Girdhala Ram, R/o Village Dubbal, Tehsil Kalayat, Distt. Kaithal.
……….Complainant.
Versus
- Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., Sub Division Kalayat, Tehsil Kalayat, Distt. Kaithal, through its S.D.O. ‘OP’.
- Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., Shakti Bhawan, Sector-6, Panchkula, through its Secretary/M.D.
..……..Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
Before: Sh. Jagmal Singh, President.
Sh. Rajbir Singh, Member.
Smt. Harisha Mehta, Member.
Present : Sh. Devinder Singh, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Amit Chaudhary, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
(JAGMAL SINGH, PRESIDENT).
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that he is consumer of Ops vide electricity connection No.SB-11-0940X and has been paying the bills regularly. The complainant has challenged the bill dt. 09.03.2016 amounting to Rs.16,934/-. The said bill is wrong and illegal. This way, the Ops are deficient in service. Hence, this complaint is filed.
2. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared before this forum and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus-standi. There is no deficiency in service on the part of answering Ops. On merits, it is submitted that the complainant is chronic defaulter of UHBVN from the month of 3/2010. The answering Ops issued the electricity bill to the complainant as per actual consumption from the month of 3/2010 to 2/2012 and thereafter, the bills were issued to the complainant on average basis from the month of 5/2012 to 7/2013 as the meter of complainant was not found at site. After that the bills were issued to the complainant on actual consumption from the month of 9/2013 to 10/2013. Thereafter, the bills were issued to the complainant on average basis from the month of 12/2013 to 2/2014 as the meter of complainant was not found at site. After that the bill was issued to the complainant on actual consumption in the month of 4/2014 but the complainant did not deposit above-said bill with the answering Ops. Thereafter, the bills were issued to the complainant on average basis from 6/2014 to 3/2016 as the meter of complainant was not found at site. The bill of Rs.16,394/- was rightly issued to the complainant and the complainant is legally bound to deposit the above-said bill with the Ops. The other contents of complaint are denied and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.
3. In support of his case, the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A and document Ex.C1 and closed evidence on 29.09.2016. On the other hand, the Ops tendered in evidence document Mark-RA and closed evidence on 15.11.2016.
4. We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and minutely and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.
5. From the pleadings and evidence of the parties, it is clear that the complainant is having domestic electricity connection No.X47-SB11/0940X. The dispute between the parties is with regard to bill dt. 09.03.2016 for sum of Rs.16,934/-. As per Ops, a bill amounting to Rs.170/- was issued to the complainant in the month of 3/2010 and this bill was issue as per actual consumption but the complainant did not deposit the above-said bill. Thereafter, a bill amounting to Rs.329/- was issued in the month of 5/2010 in which Rs.170/- were claimed as balance amount alongwith current bill and this bill was also issued as per actual consumption but the complainant did not deposit the said bill also. Similarly, the bills amounting to Rs.507/-, Rs.685/-, Rs.869/-, Rs.1090/-, Rs.1307/-, Rs.1529/-, Rs.1769/-, Rs.2004/-, Rs.2269/-, Rs.2542/-, Rs.2823/-, Rs.3187/-, Rs.6787/-, Rs.7346/-, Rs.7925/-, Rs.8469/- and Rs.8892/- were issued in the month of 7/2010, 9/2010, 11/2010, 1/2011, 3/2011, 5/2011, 7/2011, 9/2011, 11/2011, 1/2012, 3/2012, 5/2012, 9/2013, 10/2013, 12/2013, 2/2014 and 4/2014 respectively. But the complainant has not deposited any of the above-said bill. From the record, it is clear that the complainant has placed only one bill, Ex.C1. The complainant has not placed any receipt to prove that he has deposited any of the bill as mentioned by the Ops in their reply. The complainant has also not placed any receipt to prove that he has deposited any bill previous to the bill in question. Even inspite of query by this Forum, the complainant has failed to place any such receipt on the file. These circumstances clearly indicate that the complainant has not deposited any bill since the month of March, 2010. So, the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency on the part of Ops.
6. Thus, as a sequel of above discussion, we find no merit in the complaint and accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced.
Dt.10.01.2017.
(Jagmal Singh),
President.
(Harisha Mehta), (Rajbir Singh),
Member Member.
