1. The court is on tour at Layyah.
2. The case is at the stage of the arguments which have been heard and the file has been perused as such I proceed to dispose off the complaint by discussion in the following paragraphs:-
3. The grievance of the claimant as alleged in the complaint is to the effect that electric meter No.SP.290340 is installed on his residence; that the meter is defective for 4/5 months; that the bills are being issued to the claimant without meter reading; that no action has been taken on oral request and written applications of the claimant; that the average consumption of the claimant is 150/180 unit per month; that the claimant has previously deposited illegal excessive bill having loss of thousands of rupees; that the defendants have refused to replace the defective meter and also refused to issue the correct bill; that the staff of the defendants is threatening the claimant; that it is requested that the meter should be replaced urgently and current bill should be corrected and special damages should be awarded to the claimant.
4. The version of the defendants in their joint written statement endorsed by Sheikh Ghulam Abbas Advocate as legal advisor is to the effect that correct bills are being issued on the basis of correct meter in accordance with the reading on the new meter; that no threat has been issued by the defendants to the claimant as alleged in the complaint; that the meter would be replaced when new meter would be available; that the application is baseless; that the claimant has no cause of action; that the claimant has not come with clean hands; that the complaint has not been verified in accordance with law; that special costs under S.35 (A) of CPC should be awarded to the defendants; that the complaint should be dismissed.
5. It is pertinent to note that although evidence is necessary to be recorded under S.30 of PCP Act 2005 for disposal of the complaints by the Consumer Courts but since the procedural laws known as the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898; the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, the Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891 are not strictly applicable to the proceedings of the Consumer Courts, as such the propriety demands that the regular evidence should not be recorded in such cases where the points for determination are mostly based on the copies of the admitted documents available in the file of the complaint or admitted in the pleadings.
6. I am of the view that certain cases can be effectively disposed off without recording regular evidence and by reliance upon the copies of the documents annexed in the file of the court for quick disposal so as to avoid the technicalities and unnecessary delay in the disposal of cases. It is further observed that it is proper and necessary to treat the copies of the documents annexed with the complaint and written statement including the documents filed during the pendency of the complaint, as prima facie proof and evidence of the parties for reaching to the safe and just conclusion in such cases which are capable of disposal without recording regular evidence just like the present case.
7. The documents to be relied upon by the claimant and included in the file consist of the copy of CNIC of the claimant; copy of the license of learned counsel for the claimant; original affidavit of the claimant; copy of the legal notice issued by the claimant; copy of the disputed bill; original courier receipt about issuance of legal notice.
8. On the other hand, the documents of the defendants consist of the written arguments and original web printed bill of 07/2011; original web printed bill of 08/2011, copy of Sundry Jobs Order.
9. It is pertinent to observe that the ELECTRICITY is a PRODUCT according to the definition provided in the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 and the said definition has been made applicable on the cases under PCP Act, 2005 by S.2 ( j ) of the latter Act.
10. It is also observed that the AUTHORITY providing the ELECTRICITY as a product comes within the definition of the MANUFACTURER under S.2 (h) as such the AUTHORITY is obliged to fulfill all the responsibilities of a MANUFACTURER of the product under S.4 to 12 & 18 to 20 being supplied in dual capacity of the MANUFACTURER along with responsibilities of the SERVICE PROVIDER under S.13 to 17 of PCP Act, 2005. The responsibilities of the respondents are therefore dual as MANUFACTURERS as well as SERVICE PROVIDERS. The expectation of the public about better services of the MEPCO is therefore genuine and enforceable under the law.
11. I have observed from the perusal of the file in the light of the arguments of the parties that the claimant is being charged with 292 units per month as average charges while his meter was dead stop at the reading of 10399 units when checked during the pendency of the present complaint and separate check meter has already been installed on 17-08-2011 and the reading on the check meter on 03-09-2011 was recorded as 000171 amounting to 171 units during the period between 17- 08-2011 and 03-09-2011 meaning thereby that the consumption of 171 units was made in 17 days which amounts to 129 units in remaining 14 days total coming to 300 units for one month on the basis of the check meter.
12. I am of the view that it is proper to take the reading of three consecutive months on the check meter so as to determine the ratio of the consumption and to ascertain average charges which were liable to be charged during the disputed period on the basis of the said consumption.
13. As far as the prayer about the recovery of the damages is concerned, it is hereby observed that: the return of the consideration or a part thereof and the costs is provided in the law where the consumer has suffered the loss of utility or lack of benefit only while the manufacturer or service provider is also liable for the damages where the consumer has suffered any damage from the defective product u/s 10 & faulty service u/s 15; that the manufacturer or service provider is liable to a consumer for damages proximately caused by the defective product u/s 4 & faulty service u/s 13; that the liability of the manufacturer or service provider is not limited or excluded by the terms of any contract or notice about the defective product u/s 12 & faulty service u/s 17; that the disclosure of the details has been made essential about the product and service where the nature of the same is such that it is material to the decision of the consumer to enter into the contract with reference to the product u/s 11 & service u/s 16; that the standard for the provision of services is determined as such which a consumer could reasonably expect to obtain in Pakistan at the time of the provision of the service u/s 14; that the court is authorized to direct the defendant to pay reasonable compensation for any loss suffered due to negligence of the defendant u/s 31(e); that to award damages where appropriate u/s 31(f); that to award costs including lawyer's fees incurred on the legal proceedings u/s 31(g) of PCP Act, 2005.
14. It is settled law that the manufacturer or service provider is not liable for any damages except a return of the consideration or a part thereof and the costs, specifically where the consumer has not suffered any damages from the product or provision of service except lack of utility/benefit. Since there is no explanation in the present claim about any other damages except the loss of utility or lack of benefit as such I find that there is no need to put the case for evidence to provide such damages and the claimant is not entitled to recover the damages in the given circumstances.
15. In accordance with above discussion, the complaint is hereby disposed off with the direction for issuance of modified bill relating to the current charges on the basis of the check meter according to the actual consumption while fresh calculation is to be made about the average charges of the disputed period on the basis of the consumption of three months relating to the check meter and if the previous deposited amount is found to be in the excess of the modified charges on the basis of the said meter then the same are directed to be credited as advance amount in the account of the claimant and it is also directed that either the check meter should be continued as regular meter after calculation of the average consumption of three months w.e.f. 17-08-2011 onwards or a new healthy meter should be installed at the relevant place out side the premises of the claimant free of costs.
16. As far as the request for the grant of special damages claimed by the claimant and special costs claimed by the defendant, the same are not proper to be awarded in the above mentioned circumstances when the defendants have implemented the interim order of this court by installation of check meter.
17. As far as the preliminary objections contained in the written statement are concerned, the same are technical in nature and can not be allowed to restrain the claimant from pursuing his legal remedy against the disputed bill.
18. As far as the competency of this court is concerned, it is clarified that there is the restriction only about the detection bill which is barred by ruling of the Honourable High Court from challenging in the Consumer Court whereas there is no such restrictions relating to the bills based on average consumption as such this court has the jurisdiction to adjudicate the present case.
19. In accordance with above discussion, the complaint is hereby disposed off accordingly to the extent of the correction of the disputed bill whereas the complaint is dismissed to the extent of special damages.
20. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
21. A copy of this order be provided free of costs to the claimant and the representative of the defendants if demanded within 30 days along with urgent issuance of a copy through post to the RO MEPCO Layyah for immediate compliance.
22. A copy of this order is directed to be made available for publishing on the internet to the website of Punjab Consumer Protection Council Secretariat, 135-J, Model Town, Lahore for public disclosure and easy access of information to the consumers relating to the products and services in accordance with Rule 25 of PCP Rules, 2009.
23. The file of this complaint is to be consigned to the record room duly page marked with proper index and after due completion and made available for issuance of attested copies and kept under safe custody till the period fixed for destruction in accordance with the Rules & Orders of Honourable Lahore High Court.