ORDER

Padma Pandey, Member—This appeal is directed against the order dated 15.02.2022 rendered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh (for brevity hereinafter to be referred as the Ld. Lower Commission), vide which, it allowed the Consumer Complaint bearing no. CC/1064/2019, in the following manner:—

“8. Taking into consideration the above discussion & findings, the present complaint of the Complainants is allowed against the Opposite Party. Accordingly, the demand raised by the OP for electricity arrear to the tune of Rs.1,23,124/- vide Bill Ann.C-2, dated 24.7.2019, stands quashed. The Opposite Party is also directed to pay a lumpsum amount of Rs.15000/- to the complainant towards compensation for causing him immense mental agony & harassment as well as litigation expenses.

The above said order shall be complied with by the Opposite Party within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of its copy, failing which they shall be liable to pay additional cost of Rs.5000/- apart from the above awarded amount.”

2. Before the Ld. Lower Commission, it was the case of the Respondent/Complainant that he was allotted H.No.520, Sector 11, Chandigarh in the year 2004 and was having electricity connection bearing Account No. 102/1142/052001. Before the allotment of the said House, the Respondent/Complainant was allotted H.No.735, Sector 7-C, Chandigarh, which he vacated in December, 2003 due to his transfer to Ferozepur and delivered the possession after his transfer and there was no consumption of electricity from the meter on the part of the Respondent/complainant. It was alleged that to his shock, the Respondent/Complainant received a bill for the billing cycle 02/4 dated 28.05.2019 for an amount of Rs.1,18,306/- (including Rs.1,06,432/- as sundry charges) for the period from 25.02.2019 to 25.04.2019 in which old reading shown as 42174 and new reading as 44354 and as such consumption of 2180 units were shown. According to the Respondent/complainant, the demand of the alleged sundry charges after a lapse of 15 years was illegal & arbitrary and he was not liable to pay the same. On enquiry, the Respondent/Complainant was informed that the defaulting amount of Rs.48,681/- were pending since 2004 and annual surcharge was being added without any intimation to him. The Respondent/Complainant alleged to have not received any notice regarding the alleged pending electricity bill for the meter installed in H.No.735, Sector 7-C, Chandigarh and neither any objection was raised regarding the issuance of the new connection due to any such alleged defaulting amount pending or due against him. According to him as per the allotment rules and regulations of the Chandigarh Administration, the vacation report of the vacated Govt. House was not issued to the employee until No Dues Certificate of the electricity and water charges is issued to the Maintenance Department. Hence, the aforesaid Consumer Complaint was filed before the Ld. Lower Commission, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Appellants/OPs.

3. In the reply filed before the Ld. Lower Commission, while admitting the factual matrix of the case, the Appellants/OPs pleaded that the bill amount of Rs.54,809/- raised by them in respect of the electricity consumed by the Respondent/Complainant while residing in Govt. accommodation i.e. H.No.735, Sector 7-C, Chandigarh and he paid part payment of Rs.6000/- only against the said bill. It was asserted that though the Respondent/ complainant applied for issuance of a NOC and permanent disconnection of the electricity supply on 22.10.2003, but he continued to occupy the said house till 21.09.2004 and had only vacated the premises after the authorities initiated the proceedings under the Public Premises Act. It was further asserted that the Respondent/ complainant received the said bill of Rs.54,809/- and acknowledged the liability by making part payment of Rs.6000/- on 13.10.2