STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UTTARAKHAND, DEHRADUN Date of Institution : 06.04.2022 Date of Final Hearing : 10.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 27.05.2024 First Appeal No. 53 / 2022 Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd. (U.P.C.L.)

Through its Executive Engineer Electricity Distribution Division Ramnagar, Roorkee, District Haridwar (Through: Smt. Shashi Yogeshwar, Advocate)

….Appellant VERSUS Sh. D.K. Tyagi S/o Sh. Ram Tyagi R/o 348/33 Ambar Talab West, Roorkee, District Haridwar (Through: Sh. Shreegopal Narson, Advocate)

…..Respondent Coram:

Ms. Kumkum Rani, President Mr. B.S. Manral, Member

ORDER

(Per: Ms. Kumkum Rani, President):

This appeal under Section 41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 has been directed against the judgment and order dated 13.01.2022 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haridwar in consumer complaint No. 31 of 2021 styled as Sh. D.K. Tyagi Vs. Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd., Roorkee, District Haridwar, wherein and whereby the complaint was allowed.

2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, in brief, are as such that the complainant had obtained a domestic electricity connection No. R.M.20138064885 of 4KW from the opposite party and was paying regularly electricity charges to the office of Electricity Department – opposite party. The complainant had paid Rs. 20,847/- on dated 19.12.2019 in the office of opposite party alongwith complaint to the opposite party that his meter is running excessively, therefore, correct meter reading was not showing in the meter. Thereupon, the opposite party installed a new meter after uninstalling the old meter on dated 04.01.2020 with the sealing certificate book No. 312 Sl. No. 2. The opposite party had found its seal etc. as O.K. The opposite party has neither written anything in remark column about slow running of meter, nor showing the testing report of the said meter, but the electricity bills of excessive amount were dispatched to the complainant and the complainant always requested to correct the same. Lastly, the opposite party sent a demand notice to the complainant vide letter No. 71401210028 dated 14.01.2021 of Rs. 2,72,890/- of the month of December, 2020 and also threatened that if the same was not paid, then it would be recovered as arrear of land revenue. By the said act, the complainant had suffered gross mental agony and physical and financial loss and such act comes within the purview of gross negligence and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party for which the opposite party is fully responsible. The complainant is the consumer of the opposite party and the District Commission has the jurisdiction to entertain the same, therefore, the relief brought in the bottom of the complaint be awarded in favour of the complainant.

3. The opposite party in its written statement has stated that the facts narrated in the complaint are totally false; the truthfulness and correct real facts are as such that the complainant never paid the electricity bills of his electricity connection, therefore, the amount of the electricity bills was increased. The complainant has paid Rs. 20,000/- on dated 31.12.2019 in the account of opposite party and simultaneously made a complaint in the office of opposite party that the opposite party did not install the new meter in the premises of the complainant, whereas the opposite party has found that the old was correct on dated 04.01.2020. It is further contended that as per the complaint of the complainant, a check meter was installed from dated 10.07.2020 to 24.07.2020 and the check meter was installed on dated 10.07.2020. As per check meter report, it came to the knowledge of the opposite party that the old meter was running 86% slowly, therefore, the assessment to the tune of Rs. 1,59,356.89ps. was made and the same was added in the electricity bill of the complainant. As per the department’s routine procedure, a notice on dated 13.02.2021 was sent to the complainant,