Date of filing:- 25/03/2017.
Date of Order:-31/01/2018.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (COURT)
B A R G A R H.
Consumer Complaint No. 18 of 2017.
Pramod Kumar Hota S/o. Late Gobinda Hota, R/o. Govindpali, W.No.15, Bargarh Po/Ps/District.Bargarh. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... Complainant .
- V e r s u s -
Western Electricity Supply Co Utility represented through;
The Executive Engineer, Electrical, Bargarh Electrical Division, Canal Colony, Bargarh, Po/Ps/Dist-Bargarh.
The Sub-Divisional Officer, Electricals, Near Gandhi Chowk, Bargarh, Po/Ps/Dist-Bargarh.
The Sectional Officer, Electrical, Section-3(three), Near Gandhi Chowk, Bargarh, Po/Ps/Dist-Bargarh. ..... ..... ..... .... Opposite Parties.
Counsel for the Parties:-
For the Complainant :- Sri S.K.Panda, Advocate with others Advocates.
For the Opposite Party No.1(one)
and No. 2(two) :- Sri P.K.Acharya, Advocate with others Advocates.
For the Opposite Party No.3(three):- Ex-parte.
-: P R E S E N T :-
Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... P r e s i d e n t.
Ajanta Subhadarsinee ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r (W).
Dt.31/01/2018. -: J U D G E M E N T:-
Presented by Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra, President:-
Brief Fact of the Case;-
The case of the Complainant is brief is pertaining to allegation of deficiencies of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties as follows.
The case of the Complainant is that he being a consumer of the Opposite Parties vide his Consumer No.512123120011 supplied to his residential house in Gobindpali Bargarh,was consuming the electricity energy and has been paying the billing amount every month as per the bill provided by the Opposite Parties without any default on his part.
His further case is that suddenly in the month of January-2017 the Opposite Parties claimed an amount of Rs.43,581.30/-(Rupees forty three thousand five hundred eighty one and thirty paise)only along with the usual monthly bill amounting to Rs.3,522.58/-(Rupees three thousand five hundred twenty two and fifty eight paise)only showing the amount as arrear bill to which the Complainant immediately complained before the authority of the Opposite Parties and in response to his complain the Opposite Parties assured him to rectify the same and that as per the demand of the Opposite Parties the Complainant complied with the payment of the average bill of six months, but in spite of that the Opposite Parties again issued the bill for the month of February mentioning therein the aforesaid amount without any rectification and finally disconnected his consumer line on Dt.22.03.2017 without any prior notice as per the provision of Rules -100 of O.E.R.C, which is an unfair trade practice and abused of law, and being asked for such of their action they said it to be mistake on their part and immediately given the connection, which amounts to deficiencies of service as per the Complainant just to harass him intentionally, and in furtherance to his case although the meter was functioning the Opposite Parties have treated it as stopped and has tried to extract money from the Complainant as has mentioned in the billing on total unit as 674(six hundred seventy four) instead of 646(six hundred forty six) as compared to the bills issued on their reading of the meter, thus has committed unfair trade practice and deficiencies in rendering proper service to the Complainant so he preferred to file the case to redress his grievance and also embodied the materials facts and law relating to the provision in support of his case along with the following documents ,
Copies of bills issued by the Opposite Parties from April-2014 till the date of filling of the case.
Copy of representation filed by the Complainant Dt.25.02.2017 and has claimed Rs.3,00,000/-(Rupees three lakhs)only in lieu of his mental physical and social harassment.
Having gone through the Complaint it’s supporting documents and on hearing the counsel for the Complainant found it to be a genuine case admitted and served notice on the Opposite Parties, And on being noticed the Opposite Parties appeared before the Forum and have filed their version.
The averments made by the Opposite Parties are all evasive one to the case of the Complainant with additional allegation of suppression of materials fact and has contended that the bills of the Complainant till November -2013 were raised as per actual meter reading with installation of a new meter and the same reading was brought in to record in the month of August-2014 but the provisional billing against the consumption continued till Dt.25.07.2016 which was noticed that the same was running with 12448(twelve thousand four hundred forty eight) unit and since then the bill was raised as per actual reading from August-2014 to December-2016 and thus has served with the average /splitting bill for an unit of 534(five hundred thirty four) per month against the total bill revision period of 29(twenty nine) months for an amount of Rs.43,511/-(Rupees forty three thousand five hundred eleven) and has claimed to be correct as such the Complainant’s case lacks any merit and liable to be dismissed .
Having gone through the pleadings of both the parties and the rivalry contention of both the counsels of the respective parties and the written arguments filed by the Advocate for the Complainant supported by the citation of the relevant provision of law, we are of the view that the case rests on the following points for adjudication of the same.
Whether the Opposite Parties are deficient in giving service to the Complainant and has committed unfair trade practice against him ?
Whether the Complainant is entitled for any relief ?
1st While delving deep in to the materials available in the record with respect to the allegation of unfair trade practice and deficiencies in giving service to the Complainant, we verified vividly the bills issued to the Complainant by the Opposite Parties for the total period from where it is clearly evident that the same were issued on the basis of the actual reading of the meter thus establishes the plea of the Complainant that the meter was all along was in a running condition and also it can be safely concluded from the hand written documents Dt.22.03.2017 of one of the Opposite Parties admitting that the disconnection was due to mistake in addition to the supporting calculation furnished by him which has not been challenged shows the callousness of the Opposite Parties, in furtherance to the case of the plea of the Opposite Parties with regard to the provisional bill and the actual arrear bill as claimed to be correct & rightly served with the Complainant, the provision referred by the Complainant that O.E.R.C Act & regulation defining the provisional billing as ‘the amount thus shall be adjusted against the bill raised on the basis of actual meter reading during subsequent billing cycle such provisional billing shall not continue for more than one meter reading cycle at a stretch’’ in contrary to which the Opposite Parties has gone much beyond the provision. Furthermore the contention of the counsel for the Complainant fortifying with the provision Rule 94 (2) of O.E.R.C Distribution (condition of supply ) Code, 2004 that “No sum due from any Consumer, under this section shall be recoverable after a period of two years from the date when such sum became first due unless such sum has been shown continuously as recoverable as arrears charges of electricity supplied and the licensee shall not cut off the supply of electricity for non –payments of such sum which has become non-recoverable’’ and as has never been shown in preceding bills as arrears thus has justifies the case of the Complainant against the action of the Opposite Parties which amounts to deficiencies in rendering service and unfair trade practice against the Complainant, as such it is answered in affirmative in support of the Complainant .
2nd Whether the Complainant is entitled for any relief, in this regard as we have already discussed in detail of the case in our foregoing paragraphs with an affirmative views in support of the complainant. Now it can be safely concluded that the Opposite Parties have measurably failed to prove any case in contradictory against the Complainant thus entitling him for the reliefs as hereunder for which all the Opposite Parties are liable jointly and severally, hence order follows.
O R D E R
The Opposite Parties are directed jointly and severally to quash the alleged billing amount of Rs.43,581.30/-(Rupees forty three thousand five hundred eighty one and thirty paise)only raised against the Complainant vide Consumer No. 512123120011 and also directed to issue regular monthly bill as per the actual meter reading from the month of January -2017 onwards starting from meter reading unit of 16127(sixteen thousand one hundred twenty seven) as per the provision of law and further directed to pay an amount of Rs. 5,000/-(Rupees five thousand)only in lieu compensation for the mental and physical harassment caused to the Complainant. The order of the Forum shall be carried out by the Opposite Parties within thirty days from the date of the receipt of the order in default of which the Opposite Parties would be liable for the punitive measure as per the Provision of the Consumer protection Act-1986.
Accordingly the Complaint is allowed against the Opposite Parties and the same is pronounced in the open forum to-day i.e. on Dt.31.01.2018 and the same is disposed off.
Typed to my dictation
and corrected by me.
(Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra)
P r e s i d e n t.
I agree
(Ajanta Subhadarsinee)
M e m b e r (w)
