- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Kupwara Consumer Commission Slams Power Company For Wrong Bill, Orders Compensation
Kupwara Consumer Commission Slams Power Company For Wrong Bill, Orders Compensation A resident of Kupwara, Kashmir, Mohammad Aslam Sheikh, has secured a decisive win against the Kashmir Power Distribution Corporation Ltd (KPDCL) at the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The commission, presided over by Peerzada Qousar Hussain and Nyla Yaseen, ruled in favour of Sheikh...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Kupwara Consumer Commission Slams Power Company For Wrong Bill, Orders Compensation
A resident of Kupwara, Kashmir, Mohammad Aslam Sheikh, has secured a decisive win against the Kashmir Power Distribution Corporation Ltd (KPDCL) at the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The commission, presided over by Peerzada Qousar Hussain and Nyla Yaseen, ruled in favour of Sheikh and imposed a fine of ₹1 lakh on the power company for erroneously billing him and causing him undue mental and financial hardship.
The case stemmed from a bill of ₹49,578 issued in the name of Mohammad Aslam Katari that Sheikh received in October 2023. Sheikh, who was residing with relatives while constructing a new house, had dismantled his old residence and was not even using electricity at the time. Despite not being a registered consumer, he was inexplicably listed as one by KPDCL.
Sheikh's attempts to rectify the situation with department officials proved futile. He even faced pressure to pay the bill, leading his mother to pay a portion (₹2,600) fearing repercussions. Sheikh presented witness statements to support his claim of not using electricity.
The commission acknowledged Sheikh's efforts to resolve the issue and the department's negligence in generating the bill under the wrong name and pressuring payment. This amounted to a "deficiency in service." Consequently, the Commission directed the concerned officials of the KPDCL to take corrective measures. These included a full refund of the erroneously deposited amount of ₹2,600 to Sheikh. Additionally, they must pay him compensation of ₹1 lakh within six weeks. If the compensation is not paid within the stipulated timeframe, it will accrue simple interest at an annual rate of 6 per cent from the date of the order. Finally, the department was instructed to re-register Sheikh as a consumer and adhere strictly to prescribed procedures for any future billing.