Andhra Pradesh

Nellore

CC/28/2013

Chinthalapudi Raja Sekar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd. Represented by its 1.The Asst Divisional Eng - Opp.Party(s)

A.Venkateswarulu

25 Jul 2015

ORDER

Date of filing      : 16-02-2013

Date of Disposal : 25-07-2015

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

           :: NELLORE ::

                                                       

 

Saturday, this the 25th day of JULY, 2015.

 

              PRESENT:  Sri M.Subbarayudu Naidu  B.Com.,B.L., LL.M.,

                                        President(FAC) & Member

 

                                           Sri N.S.Kumara Swamy, B.Sc., LL.B., Member

                                        

                                C.C.No.28/2013

 

Chinthalapudi Raja Sekhar,

S/o.late Chinthalapudi Adi Narayana,

Hindu, aged 45 years,

D.No.13/16, Kummari Street,

(Near) Dr.C.R.Reddy Hospital,

Gudur Town, S.P.S.R., Nellore District.                              …  Complainant

 

                      Vs.

                                                                         

                                                                               

Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution

 Company Ltd., Represented by its

 

1. The Asst. Divisional Engineer,

Operation, APSPDCL,

Gudur Town, SPSR Nellore District.

 

2. The Divisional Engineer,

APSPDCL,

Vidyuth Bhavan A.K.Nagar,

Nellore Corporation,

S.P.S.R.Nellore District.

 

3. The Assistant Accounts Officer (ERO),

Gudur Town, APSPDCL.,

SPSR Nellore District.

 

4. Chief Vigilance Officer,

Vidyuth Bhavan, A.K.Nagar,

Nellore Corporation,

SPSR Nellore District.

 

5. The Final Assessing Officer-cum- Divisional Engineer,

APSPDCL,

SPSR Nellore District.                                             …   Opposite parties.

 

 

This matter coming on  17-07-2015 before us for final hearing in the presence of Sri A.Venkateswarlu, Advocate for the complainant and  Sri  K.Padmanabhaiah, Advocate for the 1^st and 3^rd opposite parties, 2,4 and 5 opposite parties remained absent,   and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Forum passed the following:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          

 

 

 

 

 

ORDER                                                                                                                                                                                                                         (BY SRI M.SUBBARAYUDU NAIDU, PRESIDENT(FAC) ON BEHALF OF THE BENCH)

 

 

        This consumer case is filed against the opposite parties 1 to 5 by the complainant to direct the acts of the opposite parties, are illegal and arbitrary in order demanding him to pay an amount of Rs.23,384/-, demand notice           dated 04-02-2013 on the allegation that he had committed theft of energy worth of Rs.21,198/- and directing the opposite parties 1 to 5 not to disconnect the said service connection for non-payment of alleged the said amount; to pay compensation to the complainant for torturing, humiliation, harassment by phone calls, mental stress, pain and suffering by attributing unnecessary allegations on the innocent and law – abiding complainant under mental agony and launching unwarranted litigation to a tune of Rs.25,000/-, to direct the opposite parties 1 to 5 to pay  the costs of the complainant; and also to grant such other reliefs as the Hon’ble Forum may deem fit and  proper under the circumstances of the case.

 

 The factual matrix leading to filing of this consumer case is stated as hereunder:

      

1.     It is the case of the complainant that he had a house at door no.13/6, Kummari street, near Dr.C.R.Reddy Hospital, Gudur Town, SPSR Nellore District.  The said house had a house electrical service connection which is bearing its H.S.C.No.3111301008200 stands in the name of his father by name Mr.Chintalapudi Audinarayana.  The complainant had used to consume the electrical power from the said service connection in order to arrange a separate electrical meter to the said connection by the opposite parties/respondents.  The reasons are not known to the complainant that the said meter was burned and immediately the very same day was intimated to the A.E., Gudur, through his representation dated 29-05-2012.

 

2.    The allegations of the complainant in para-3 of his complaint that  even without changing the burned meter, the opposite parties served demand notices to the complainant for H.S.C.No.3111301008200 from the month of May, 2012 onwards and the complainant is regularly paying the charges to the opposite parties without fail.

 

3.      The allegations of the complainant in para-4 of his complaint that while the matter is as such all of sudden the A.P.S.P.D.C.Ltd., served a notice to him on 26-12-2012 relating to Provisional Assessment Notice for theft of electricity for Rs.21,198/- and they demanded to approach SHO, Vigilance & APTS Team, Nellore for paying the compounding fee of Rs.2,000/- for closure of criminal cases as first offence as per section 154 of I.E.Act.  The complainant had orally informed to the opposite parties that he did not committed any theft of electricity and service of said notice is wrong and he is not liable for either payment of Rs.21,198/- or Rs.2,000/- of compounding fee for closure of criminal cases as first offence, but they had threatened with dire consequences that they will arrest him in question if the said amount not paid by him. 

 

4.  The allegations of the complainant in para-5 of his complaint that when the opposite parties are regularly threatening the complainant and making phone calls to insisting and humiliating more particularly harassing him even there is no any fault of him and as per recorded evidence, it is very clearly apparent due to deficiency of their service by replacing a new meter in the place of burned meter within time, the complainant had made his representation on 09-01-2012 to the 1^st opposite party and copy was served through registered post to all the opposite parties.

 

5.  The allegations of the complainant in para-6 of his complaint that immediately after receipt of the representation, the opposite parties came to know that the fault committed by them and immediately rushed up and arranged new meter in the place of burned meter.  On 04-02-2013, the opposite party had served a demand notice alleging that the complainant shall be payable an amount of Rs.23,384/- and demanded to pay the said amount by 19-02-2013 otherwise the service connection will be disconnected by 07-02-2013. Aggrieved of the said demand notice, the complainant approached this Hon’ble Forum, when there is no any other alternative for him.  Hence this complaint.

 

     6.     At first instance, on 25-03-2013 Sri K.Padmanabhaiah had filed Vakalat for opposite party Nos.1 and 3 and since then consumer case is posted for filing written version on 29-04-2013 onwards and notices were issued and served to opposite parties 2, 4 and 5 and they are absent continuously till     10-03-2015 and posted the case thereafter to file written version finally on 1-4-2015.  But even then, the opposite parties 1 and 3 did not evince interest whatsoever and taking time after time to file vakalat on behalf of opposite parties 2,4 and 5.  At last the case is posted for orders, and it is reserved on    6-7-2015 and then co-member has availed leave on 17-07-2015.  The docket sheet of the case had revealed all the details of the progress of the case, since its admission of complaint.

 

7.    The opposite parties are kept silent and not defended their case.  It means that admittedly the case of the complainant against opposite parties, are true or not, is the point for determination for us. Almost, all the opposite parties are silent without any protest and not making any defence on their side.

 

8.   The complainant has filed an affidavit-evidence on 30-06-2014 and the documents are marked on his behalf as Exs.A1 to A10.  Both the parties have not filed their written arguments of the case.  The opposite parties are never bothered their case at any time right from the beginning of proceedings of the case since 25-03-2013.

 

9.   In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, basing on the available material on record, the question is that whether the opposite parties are fair in their action/inaction and attitude in their behavior with the complainant, is the point for determination.  The following points are to be determined in a given set of circumstances of the case:-  They are as follows as, namely

 

1. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties towards the complainant?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for, if it is so, to what extent?
3. To what relief?

 

10.  POINTS 1 AND 2:  In view of the subject-matter involved in this consumer case and its inter-dependence of the issues with each other, we have taken up together for discussion and determination of the case.  The complainant has filed sworn affidavit-evidence in proof of the averments contained in the complaint.  He has adduced his evidence by way of an affidavit with documents in support of his case.

 

   The learned counsel for the complainant Sri Akula Venkateswarlu has vehemently argued that the complainant has a house and electrical service connection bearing its H.S.C.No.311301008200 stands in the name of his father by name Chinthalapudi Audi Narayana, is established and proved by Exs.A1 document dt.3-12-2012.  It is also established that the electrical meter was burned and to that effect that a letter dt.29-05-2012 which addressed to one town electricity A.E. by the complainant and requested that in its place a new electricity meter has to be installed.  The said learned counsel for the complainant has further argued that Exs.A2 is contained electricity bills (3) from April, May, July 2012 for consumption of electricity ranging from Rs.443/- to Rs.627/- by the complainant, established and proved by him; another Ex.A3 is containing the electricity bills dated 25-07-2012 for Rs.530/-, bill at 2-8-2012 for Rs.100; bill dt.2-11-2012 for Rs.90/- and bill dated           3-12-2012 for Rs.100/-, Ex.A4;  is the proceedings of the opposite party Divisional Engineer, Gudur town, Nellore (Dist.) to do justice is connection of his meter; The other documents.  Exs.A6 to A8 are the postal receipts and returned covers which are addressed to the officials of cadre of electricity; Exs.A9 is the disputed bill dated 4-2-2013 January,2013  to February, 2013 for Rs.23,384/- payable by the complainant.  He has further contended that how the bill (Exs.A9) is arises and without any explanation from the opposite parties.  It is unjust and illegal, nothing but harassment of complainant.  Finally, the said learned counsel for the complainant has argued that he is paying electricity charges to the opposite parties without fail.  The opposite parties are came to know that the fault committed by them and immediately rushed up and arranged new meter in the place of burned meter.  On 4-2-2013, the opposite parties have served a demand notice alleging that the complainant shall be payable an amount of Rs.23,384/- and demanded him to pay it by 19-02-2013 otherwise his service connection will be disconnected by 7-3-2013.  By aggrieving of the said demand notice, the complainant had approached the Hon’ble Forum.  Now, the opposite parties are unrepresented and did not file written version and their defence, it amounts to clearly they have accepted their guilt and fraud played upon the complainant to get wrongful gain.  He has also stressed much that there is a deficiency in service and negligence on the part of the opposite parties towards the complainant.  He has prayed that the reliefs are claimed in the complaint may be granted and the complaint may be allowed with costs as prayed for.

                            Forum’s Findings and observations

      Heard, the said learned counsel for the complainant alone and perused the record very careful.  He has advanced his arguments orally and led the evidence of the complainant by way of affidavit.  Here, the opposite parties are clearly unrepresented and they are miserably failed inspite of filing of vakalat for opposite parties 1 and 3 are filed.

The Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Lucknow Development Authority Vs. M.K.Gupta, AIR 1994 SC 787  held that the C.P.Act, 1986 is a welfare statute, consumer Fora can award compensation for harassment by public authorities. Not only the said Act of 1986 helps in curing the social evil for which the remedy under the ordinary civil law for various reasons has become illusory.     

       It also laid down that in case of harassment by public authorities, Consumer For a can direct the authorities to recover compensation from the concerned officers, so that it helps in curing the social evil.  It may result in improving the work culture and help in changing the outlook.

 

     The presumption is that if the party does not produce any document in support of the opposite parties, the Forum has power to draw any adverse inference against such a party or to penalize them in accordance with the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The opposite parties are deliberately abstains from adducing better evidence, which they are in a position to adduce before us.  A party is expected and is bound to prove his case as alleged by him.  We are convinced with the arguments of the said learned counsel for the complaint.  There is a substance in the complaint.  Mental worry cannot be measured in terms of money.  There is absolutely deficiency in service and mere negligence on the part of the opposite parties towards the complainant.  The opposite parties are careless and negligent by not filing written version, if any and put up their defence with the documents at earlier stages, when it is within their knowledge/possession and they must pay for their negligence.  There is a justification to judge the case infavour of the complainant.  Each case has to be judged on its own facts.  These two points are held infavour of the complainant, accordingly.

 

POINT NO.3:  In the result, the complaint is allowed in part, ordering the opposite parties 1 to 5 are jointly and severally liable and their action amounts to illegal and arbitrary in demanding the complainant to pay an amount of Rs.23,284/- (Rupees twenty three thousand two hundred and eighty four only), thereby ordering them also not to disconnect the complainant’s electricity service connection for non-payment of the above said amount.  The concerned bill dated 04-2-2013, is hereby quashed herewith; to pay compensation for harassment mental stress, pain and sufferings of complainant for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) and also to pay Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) towards costs of the complaint, within one month from the date of receipt of the order.  This point is answered in favour of the complainant, accordingly.

 

Typed to the dictation to the stenographer and corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum this the 25th day of JULY,             2015.    

 

             Sd/-                                                                            Sd/-

         MEMBER                                                                 PRESIDENT(FAC)

 

  APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

 

 WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR COMPLAINANT:

 

PW1	30-06-2014	:	Chinthalapudi Raja Sekhar, S/o.late Chinthalapudi Adi Narayana, Hindu, aged 45 years, D.No.13/16, Kummari Street, (Near) Dr.C.R.Reddy Hospital, Gudur Town, SPSR Nellore District.

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR OPPOSITE PARTIES:

 

N I L -

                                                                         

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR COMPLAINANT:

 

Ex.A1	29-05-2012	:	Representation given by the complainant to the A.E., APSPDCL, Gudur.
Ex.A2		:	Demand notices 3 in nos. for the months relating to May, 2012 to July, 2012 for H.S.C.No.3111301008200.
Ex.A3	25-07-2012 02-08-2012 02-11-2012 03-12-2012	:	Payment receipts 4 in nos. for HSC No.3111301008200.
Ex.A4	26-12-2012	:	Provisional Assessment notice for theft of electricity given by the 1st opposite party.
Ex.A5     Ex.A6   Ex.A7     Ex.A8     Ex.A9     Ex.A10	09-01-2013     11-01-2013   17-1-2013     12-1-2013     04-02-2013     -	:     :   :     :     :     :	Copy of representation addressed by the complainant to the 1st opposite party and others.   Postal receipts (original) 6 in nos.   Postal acknowledgement cards 4 in nos.     Returned un-served postal covers 3 in nos.     Demand notice for the month of Jan-Feb, 2013 for Rs.23,348/-.   Photostat copy of  “Concession Certificate” (physically handi capped certificate) of the complainant issued by the Govt. Doctor. Govt. Area Hospital, Gudur.

 EXHIBITS MARKED FOR OPPOSITE PARTIES:                     

 

• N I L -

          

        Id/-                                                            PRESIDENT(FAC)

 

 

Copies to:

 

1. Sri A.Venkateswarlu, Advocate,

Flat No.402, 4^th Floor, NISHITHA PARADISE,

Saraswathi Nagar, Opp: Kashuridevi Scool,

Nellore – 524 003.

 

2. Sri K.Padmanabhaiah, Advocate,

“Sreerama Nilayam”  

1^st Street, 23/1301, Tekkemitta,

Nellore-3.

 

 

3. The Divisional Engineer,

APSPDCL,

Vidyuth Bhavan A.K.Nagar,

Nellore Corporation,

S.P.S.R.Nellore District.

 

4. Chief Vigilance Officer,

Vidyuth Bhavan, A.K.Nagar,

Nellore Corporation,

SPSR Nellore District.

 

5. The Final Assessing Officer-cum- Divisional Engineer,

APSPDCL,

SPSR Nellore District.    

 

Date when order copies are issued: