The North District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum rejected the discom's argument that as the bill was corrected the complainant is not entitled to any relief, saying BSES had made the correction only after the complaint was filed.
"The complaint was filed by the complainant (Om Prakash) on April 10. The bill was corrected on July 17 and the final bill came to Rs 2,720 which has already been paid by the complainant. It is, therefore, clear that the opposite party (BSES Yamuna) had raised an incorrect bill which the complainant was not liable to pay...
"Complainant had to file the complaint to get the error rectified. During the pendency of the proceedings, opposite party took cognisance of the mistake and corrected the bill. Grievance of the complainant has been redressed, nevertheless he had to resort to litigation to get the needful done. In our opinion, he is entitled for cost and compensation.
"Accordingly, we direct the opposite party to pay lump-sum amount of Rs 2,000 to the complainant by way of cost and compensation," the bench presided by Babu Lal said.
Om Parkash, who runs a small shop in North Delhi, had said in his complaint that the discom had sent a notice on November 30 last year alleging he was unauthorisedly supplying electricity to a nearby premises where power connection had been disconnected since 2005 due to non-payment of dues.
The discom had transferred the unpaid dues of the nearby premises to his account and had raised a demand of Rs 3,99,500 from him on January 3, he had said.