The district consumer disputes redressal commission-2, has quashed a domestic piped natural gas (PNG) bill of ₹21,833 issued to a Sector 46 resident and ordered the Indian Oil-Adani Gas Pvt Ltd to pay ₹10,000 as compensation for harassment and litigation expenses.
Complainant, Deepak Marwaha, had stated that the PNG connection was installed at his Sector 46 house, where his relatives reside, in 2018. He maintained that all bills raised till May 2023 were paid regularly but suddenly, he was issued a bill of ₹29,622, which was later reduced to ₹21,833. Despite repeated emails and a legal notice seeking correction, he received no satisfactory response from the company.
In their reply, the company stated the bills before May 2023 showed no consumption of gas; as such, the bills were raised on minimum charges. Later, during an inspection, it was found that the meter was not working.
Accordingly, the firm raised a corrected bill dated May 29, 2023, after adjusting the previous bills payments made by the complainant and the amount payable came to ₹21,883.
The consumer commission, however, found that the gas company failed to place any documentary proof to establish that the meter had been defective since installation. The commission also noted that no inspection report, repair record, or replacement details were produced. “The opposite party (firm) has also failed to justify as to how they suddenly woke up from their deep slumber from the year 2018 (when the gas connection was issued) and suddenly realised in May 2023 that the meter was not working/faulty,” the commission observed.
{{/usCountry}}The consumer commission, however, found that the gas company failed to place any documentary proof to establish that the meter had been defective since installation. The commission also noted that no inspection report, repair record, or replacement details were produced. “The opposite party (firm) has also failed to justify as to how they suddenly woke up from their deep slumber from the year 2018 (when the gas connection was issued) and suddenly realised in May 2023 that the meter was not working/faulty,” the commission observed.
{{/usCountry}}It further observed that billing records submitted by the company itself showed that several bills had been generated on the basis of actual readings, contradicting the claim that the meter had remained faulty for years. The panel also criticised the spike in consumption shown in the revised bill, pointing out that usage had jumped dramatically from near-zero levels to a figure described as astronomical and beyond reasonable explanation.
Concluding that the gas company acted without sufficient proof and failed to justify the revised demand, the commission quashed the bill and granted the compensation to the complainant.