Andhra Pradesh

Nellore

CC/29/2014

Shaik Raffee, alias Rafi Ahamad, S/o. Noor Ahamad - Complainant(s)

Versus

1.Superintendant Engineer APSPDC Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

S.M.Shaida

27 Jun 2017

ORDER

Date of filing       :  05-05-2014

Date of Disposal :  27-06-2017

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

           :: NELLORE ::

                                                       

Tuesday, this the 27th day of JUNE, 2017.

 

          PRESENT:  Sri V.C. Gunnaiah, B.Com., M.L, President(FAC)

                                      Sri K.Umamaheswara Rao, M.A., B.L.,  Member.                               

                     

                             

C.C.No.29/2014        

 

Shaik Raffee, alias Rafi Ahamad,

S/o.Noor Ahamad,

Muslim, aged about 50 years, Businessman,

R/o. D.No.27-1-788, Majeed Centre, Balaji Nagar,

Nellore                                                                                  …  Complainant

 

                      Vs.

                                                                                                                                                                  1. The Superintendant Engineer,

    APSPDC Ltd., Vidyuth Bhavan,

    Dargamitta, Nellore.

 

2.  The Assistant Divisional Engineer,

     Operation, APSPDC Ltd.,

     Stone House Pet,

     Nellore.

 

3.  The Electricity  Revenue Officer,

     Stone House Pet,

     Nellore.                                                                          … Opposite parties

 

This matter coming on  06-06-2017 before us for final hearing in the presence of Sri S.M.Shaida, Advocate for the complainant and Sri.K.Padmanabhaiah, Advocate for the opposite parties and  having stood over for consideration till this day, this Forum passed the following:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          

 

       ORDER                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       (By Sri K.Umamaheswara Rao, M.A., B.L., Member)

 

 

          The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays the Hon’ble Forum, to direct the opposite parties to cancel the electricity bill dated 15-12-2013 for the month of November, 2013 to December, 2013, to issue correct bill to the complainant and to pay damages of Rs.20,000/- for mental agony to the complainant and that such other and further reliefs.

 

 

 

2.  The averments of the complaint in brevity are as follows:

 

  The complainant running small hotel business in Balaji Nagar, Nellore and he is having electricity connection to his premises situated in D.No.27-1—788.  The service no is 3321302166681. But, the complainant regularly paying the monthly consumption charges to the opposite parties subsequently they issued a bill dated 15-12-2013  for the month of November, 2013 for a sum of Rs.42,514/-.  Then, the complainant approached the opposite parties and requested to issue  correct bill as per meter consumption for which the OPs did not respond.   The complainant also informed to the opposite parties relating to previous months consumption.  The complainant submits that the opposite parties threatened that they disconnect the connection in case of non-payment of bill amount.  The complainant further submits that the said bill is fraud and created bill so the acts of the opposite parties comes under the purview deficiency of service.  Hence, the complaint.

 

3.  The brief facts of the counter on behalf of the 3^rd opposite party are as follows:

 

           The opposite party submits that all the allegations in the complaint are all false and frivolous.  So, the complaint is not maintainable.  The opposite party states that the complainant’s service connection bearing No.3321302166681 was released on 16-7-2011 in the name of Sk.Rafi, who is the complainant is herein with a contracted load of 5 K.W. under LT Category – II with 3 phase supply subsequently the complainant gave a complaint to the opposite parties stating that during the month of December, 2013, a bill was issued to him for a huge amount of Rs.42,514/- and requested to issue correct bill as per meter consumption.  Actually the bill was issued on 15-12-2013 demanding him to pay Rs.2,051/- and Rs.40,463/- which is the arrears of the service and has not paid by the consumer for previous months i.e., October, 2013, November, 2013 and also balance of September, 2013 totalling amount of Rs.42,514/-.  The complainant/consumer paid Rs.6,702/- in the month of 10/2013.  Thereafter from October, 2013 to February, 2014, the consumer did not pay any amount against his consumption charges for S.C.No.166681. Further, the consumer paid Rs.27,553/- in the month of May, 2014. Thereafter he did not pay any amount towards his consumption charges till date.  At the request of the complainant his service meter was replaced during the month of December, 2013 and old meter was tested in the MRT Lab on 10-12-2013 in the presence of consumer and found that the old meter performance is satisfactory and no mistake in the meter was found.  The said test report was attested by the consumer/complainant.  Hence, the bill issued for Rs.42,514/- is correct.  So, the said bill need not be cancelled as the same is issued as per consumption of complainant service.  The opposite parties prays  the Forum for these and other reasons  the complaint may be dismissed with costs as there is no deficiency of service or negligence on the part of this opposite parties and the complainant is not entitled for any damages. 

 

4.   After admission of the complaint, notices were issued to opposite parties and 3rd opposite party filed their written version and the same was adopted by the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties.

 

5.  The complainant filed his affidavit as PW1 in support of his case and got marked Exs.A1 to A3 documents and also filed written arguments and on behalf of opposite parties, the 3^rd opposite party filed their affidavit as RW1 in support of their case and got marked Exs.B1 and B2 documents and also filed their written arguments.

 

6.  Heard arguments of the complainant and perused the pleadings, documentary evidence placed on record and also considered the written arguments of both parties filed.

 

 7.      The points that arise for determinations are:

 

       1) Whether the complainant comes under the purview of Consumer

           as defined under Section 2(1)(d) of C.P.Act or not?

        2) Whether the complainant is entitled any reliefs or not?

        3) To what reliefs?

 

POINT NOS.1 AND 2:    As per the pleadings and evidence of the record, we can understand that the complainant is having small hotel business for which he obtained electricity consumption service  connection under category LT2 2(B), phase-III.  To prove the same, the complainant filed Ex.A1 document, dated 15-12-2013.  In this case, the complainant obtained the service connection for commercial purpose but not for domestic use.  The same was also admitted by the complainant in his complaint and chief affidavit.   Further the complainant did not file any documentary evidence that the complaint come under the purview of  Consumer.  As per C.P.Act, if any person utilized the services from opposite parties for commercial purpose is not entitled to file the complaint before the Forum. The same aspect was discussed by our Hon’ble National Commission in  CPJ 2013(I) page, 40  (NC) in Puran Murti Education Society Vs. UHBVNL,  Consumer protection Act, 1986 – Sections 2(1)(d), 2(1)(g), 21(b) – Electricity connection – ‘Non-domestic’ use – Consumer – Commercial purpose – Complainant is not  a Consumer.

 

     In view of the above decision and discussion, we are of the view that the complainant is not a consumer for which, the complaint is not maintainable before this Forum under C.P.Act. So, we answered the points accordingly.   

 

     In this case, the opposite parties states that the complainant paid Rs.6,702/- towards consumption charges in the month of 10/2013.  Thereafter, from October, 2013 to February, 2014 the consumer did not pay any amount against his consumption charges for his service no.166681. Again, the complainant paid Rs.27,553/- in the month of May, 2014 and later the complainant did not pay any amount towards consumption charges till date to the opposite parties.  In contra, the complainant did not deny the said allegation nor file any documentary proof pertaining to upto date payment of consumption charges to the opposite parties in his evidence affidavit.  Hence, the opposite parties are at liberty to recover the arrears of consumption charges from the complainant, as per Law.

 

        As per the documents and evidence, we are of the opinion that the complainant is not a consumer and he obtained the service connection for commercial purpose to run his hotel business for which the complaint is not maintainable.

 

POINT NO.3:  In the result, the complaint is dismissed but without costs.

Typed to the dictation to the stenographer and corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum this the 27th day of JUNE, 2017.    

                Sd/-                                                                          Sd/-

         MEMBER                                                                  PRESIDENT (FAC)

 

 APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

 WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR COMPLAINANT:

 

PW1

31-07-2015

:

Shaik Rafi S/o.Noor Ahamed, Muslim, aged  about 51 years, Business man and residing at Majeed Centrel, Balaji Nagar, Nellore.

 

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR OPPOSITE PARTIES:

 

RW1

16-11-2015

:

Smt. A.Vijitha, wife of B.Polireddy, Hindu, aged about 44 years, working as Assistant Accounts Officer, ERO in APSPDCL, Town-2, Nellore.

                                                                         

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR COMPLAINANT:

 

Ex.A1	15-12-2013	:	Photostat copy of Electricity bill for Rs.42,514/- under S.No.3321302166681 issued by APSPDCL in favour of Sd. Raffee.
Ex.A2	28-03-2014	:	Photostat copy of receipt of payment No.5934339 for Rs.20,000/- issued by APSPDCL in favour of Sd. Raffee.
Ex.A3	-	:	Copy of statement showing previous statement of reading account and payments of the said service connection.

 

 

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR OPPOSITE PARTIES:                      

 

Ex.B1	12-12-2013	:	Meter Test records S.No.3321302166681 issued by Asst. Divisional Engineer, H.T.Meters, APSPDCL, Nellore. .
Ex.B2	-	:	Consumption Reports under S.No.3321302166681 in favour of Sd.Raffee.

                                                         

                                                                Id/-

                                   

                                                                      PRESIDENT (FAC)

 

 

Copies to:

 

1) Sri S.M.Shaida, Advocate, Nellore.

 

2) Sri K.Padmanabhaiah, Advocate, 23/1301, Tekkemitta,  Nellore.

 

 

Date when order copies were issued: