BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.
Complaint no.162/16.
Date of instt.: 10.06.2016.
Date of Decision: 07.04.2017.
Ved Parkash S/o Sh. Nohria Ram, r/o Village Dandota, Tehsil Guhla, Distt. Kaithal.
……….Complainant.
Versus
- Uttari Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. Sub Division Cheeka, Opp. Punjab National Bank, Guhla Road, Cheeka, Tehsil Guhla, 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. D.S.Jammu, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Amit Sudarshan, 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 bearing account No.PC-12/2223X and has been paying the bills regularly. It is alleged that the electricity consumption recording meter installed at the premises of complainant was showing consumption other than the actual consumption of complainant and the complainant made complaint in this regard to the Ops, vide which the officials of Ops checked the premises of complainant and removed the said defective consumption recording meter and imposed penalty amount which was deposited by the complainant vide receipt No.154/088630 dt. 11.07.2014. It is further alleged that on deposit of above-said penalty amount, the Ops repaired and re-installed the said removed electricity consumption recording meter but without M & T seal and plate seal, which is still installed at the premises of complainant and the working of said meter is still irregular. It is further alleged that the complainant time and again represented the Ops to replace the said defective meter with the new one by affixing therein M & T seals and plate seals but the Ops despite resolving the complaint of complainant are issuing consumption bills, much excess than that of actual consumption of complainant. The complainant has challenged the bill dt. 02.04.2016 amounting to Rs.13,331/-. 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 reply raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus-standi; jurisdiction; that the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum. The true facts are that an electricity connection bearing account No.PC-13/2223 was released in favour of complainant. The bills were issued to the complainant on average basis from February, 2013 to June, 2014 due to ‘M’ Code (M&T seal broken), whereas the meter of complainant was recording/showing actual reading. The records of above-said electricity connection was checked by audit party and account of complainant was overhauled as per sales circular No.U-29/2011 and U-15/2014 etc. by the audit party and the amount of Rs.13,001.13 paise were found chargeable in the account of complainant and this amount was posted in the bill of month of April, 2014. So, a bill of Rs.13,331/- was issued to the complainant in the month of April, 2014 in which Rs.13,001.13 paise were claimed as arrear. There is no deficiency in service on the part of answering Ops. On merits, the 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 Mark-C1 and closed evidence on 04.11.2016. On the other hand, the Ops tendered in evidence documents Ex.R1 & Ex.R2 and closed evidence on 19.12.2016.
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. Ld. Counsel for the complainant reiterated all the points mentioned in the complaint. He argued that the complainant is having electricity connection bearing account No.PC-12/2223X and has been paying the bills regularly. He further argued that the electricity consumption recording meter installed at the premises of complainant was showing consumption other than the actual consumption of complainant and the complainant made complaint in this regard to the Ops, vide which the officials of Ops checked the premises of complainant and removed the said defective consumption recording meter and imposed penalty amount which was deposited by the complainant vide receipt No.154/088630 dt. 11.07.2014. He further argued that on deposit of above-said penalty amount, the Ops repaired and re-installed the said removed electricity consumption recording meter but without M & T seal and plate seal, which is still installed at the premises of complainant and the working of said meter is still irregular. He further argued that the complainant time and again represented the Ops to replace the said defective meter with the new one by affixing therein M & T seals and plate seals but the Ops did not do so rather issued excessive bills to the complainant. He further argued that the bill dt. 02.04.2016 amounting to Rs.13,331/- issued by the Ops is wrong and illegal. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the Ops argued that the bills were issued to the complainant on average basis from February, 2013 to June, 2014 due to ‘M’ Code (M&T seal broken), whereas the meter of complainant was recording/showing actual reading. He further argued that the records of above-said electricity connection was checked by audit party and account of complainant was overhauled as per sales circular No.U-29/2011 and U-15/2014 etc. by the audit party and the amount of Rs.13,001.13 paise were found chargeable in the account of complainant and this amount was posted in the bill issued in the month of April, 2014. He further argued that the bill of Rs.13,331/- issued in the month of April, 2014 to the complainant is legal and valid.
6. From the pleadings and evidence of the parties, it is admitted case of the parties that the complainant was having a domestic electricity connection bearing account No.PC-12/2223X. The dispute between the parties is regarding the bill issued on 02.04.2016 for a sum of Rs.13,331/-. The Ops have contended that the record of the electricity connection of the complainant was audited by the audit party and an amount of Rs.13,001.13 paise was found chargeable in the account of complainant. The Ops have placed the audit report, Ex.R1 wherein the details regarding the recovery of Rs.13,001.13 paise has been mentioned from February, 2013 to June, 2014. This amount of Rs.13,001.13 paise has been pointed out by the audit party, therefore, the same has been added in the bill in question of the complainant. The complainant has produced in evidence on the file only his affidavit and bill in question. The complainant has not placed any other document on the file to prove his case. Mere allegations are not sufficient, those are necessary to be proved by cogent evidence. Therefore, the complainant has failed to prove his case. On the other hand, the audit report, Ex.R1 produced by the Ops is in detail from February, 2013 to June, 2014. Hence, in the circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency on the part of Ops.
7. 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.07.04.2017.
(Jagmal Singh),
President.
(Harisha Mehta), (Rajbir Singh),
Member. Member.
