1. The case is at the stage of the compliance of earlier orders but it appears that the same have not been complied with as such instead of contempt proceedings, it is proper to dispose off the complaint in accordance with earlier orders already issued as interim nature in the file of the present complaint by hearing the arguments which have been heard as such I proceed to dispose off the complaint by discussion in the following paragraphs:-
2. The facts of the case as alleged in the complaint are to the effect that there is the difference of the meter reading of 1,800/- units relating to the domestic electric connection of the claimant under reference No.10-15226-0614000-R; that the claimant has already paid additional charges of about 2,000/- units and additional units are also being charged for the subsequent months; that the actual meter reading was 18,050 which is shown in the latest bill as 20,050; that the meter reader has not come for reading of the meter for a certain period; that the claimant has requested for correction of the reading and the bill and to restrain the defendants from charging further units and also to restrain from disconnection and prayed for recovery of Rs.25,000/- as special costs.
3. The version of the defendants in the written statement dated 03-02-2011 is to the effect that the meter was found dead sticking and the version contained in written statement dated 24-02-2011 is to the effect that the difference of reading has been occurred due to installing bogus meter by the petitioner.
4. It is pertinent to note that the defendants were directed vide order dated 03-02 2011 that defective meter should be replaced immediately with new meter while original meter should be sent for checking to the office of M&T and the report of M&T is to be obtained about alleged defect of the meter and disputed charges should be kept separate and modified bill is to be issued relating to the current charges only without prejudice to the defence version of the defendants which would be considered after the report of M&T.
5. It is common knowledge that Meter Readers have a routine duty for charging average units in accordance with connected load relating to the defective meters and said average units are mentioned in the bills as consumed units although not shown in the meter, merely on report of the Meter Reader. I am of the view that the Meter Reader should not be allowed to exercise such power to enhance the reading on the papers fictitiously without showing the same on the meter itself and that the average units should be charged in appropriate cases only in the papers and not superfluously shown to be consumed in the meter in the form of actual consumption on the basis of the arbitrary calculation of the Meter Reader.
6. As far as the prayer about the recovery of the damages is concerned, it is hereby observed, that 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.
7. 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.
8. In accordance with above discussion, the complaint is partly accepted and the defendants are directed to comply with order dated 03-02-2011 so that defective meter must be replaced immediately with new meter while original meter should be sent for checking to the office of M&T and the report of M&T is to be obtained about alleged defect of the meter and disputed charges should be kept separate and modified bill is to be issued relating to the current charges only without prejudice to the defence version of the defendants which would be liable to be recovered by the defendants if the report of M&T is against the claimant. However the claim for recovery of Rs.25,000/- as special costs is dismissed.
9. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
10. The claimant is entitled to get the order implemented by filing the application for implementation with reference to S.31, 32 & 36 of PCP Act, 2005, if so required with the warning to the defendants that the costs to be incurred for and during the application for implementation would be liable to be recovered from them.
11. This order would not become final till the decision of the appeal u/s 34 of PCP Act, 2005, if the appeal is preferred before Honourable High Court u/s 33 of PCP Act, 2005 & Rule 18 of PCP Rules, 2009 in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of Honourable Lahore High Court.
12. A soft copy of this order is directed to be sent for publishing on the internet to the website of Punjab Consumer Protection Council, 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.
13. The Registrar of this court is being directed to send a duly attested copy of this order alongwith his covering letter about compliance to Defendant No.3 through Naib Court/Police department at the responsibility of the Copy Clerk.
14. 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.