By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,<br /> <br /> 1. Complainant is aggrieved that opposite party directed her to pay Rs.2654/- as additional current charges for the period from 7/2000 to 12/2000. She contends that no such bill was served to her. When she went to pay current charges of Rs.448/- as per bill dated, 26-04-01 opposite party wrote on the reverse side of this bill and directed her to pay Rs.2654/-. She alleges she has not received any such bill and the amount is illegal. Hence the complaint. She is also aggrieved that opposite party refused to accept current charges subsequently without payment of this disputed amount.<br /> <br /> 2. Opposite party filed version stating that from 01-01-01 onwards bimonthly spot billing was introduced. Prior to that complainant was remitting Rs.92/- per month under Provisional Invoice Card for the slab of 95 units per month. The cut off reading on 12/2000 is 2654. The actual consumption based on the reading from 7/2000 to 12/2000 was assessed as 1333 units; ie., 267 units per month. Complainant was remitting charges only for 95 units as per Provisional invoice Card. So an adjustment bill for Rs.1989/- was issued based on actual consumption recorded from 8/2000 to 12/2000. Complainant is liable to pay the same.<br /> <br /> 3. Evidence consists of the affidavits filed by either sides. Exts.A1 to A3 marked on the side of complainant. Ext.B1 marked on behalf of opposite party.<br /> <br /> 4. According to complainant the disputed bill for Rs.1989/- has not been served to her and that she was asked to pay Rs.2654/- which was the amount noted by opposite party on the reverse side of Ext.A3 bill which is for Rs.448/- dated, 26-4-01. We are able to infer that the disputed amount (bill) is Rs.1989/- for the period 8/2000 to 12/2000 and not Rs.2654/- as contended by complainant. Rs.2654/- is the meter reading on 12/2000. Even assuming that complainant was not served with the disputed bill of Rs.1989/- admittedly she has come to know of this additional bill on 2-5-2001 when she went to remit current charges of Rs.448/- as per Ext.A3 bill. Still complainant has refused to pay any additional current charges and challenges the liability to pay this amount. Complainant has not adduced any evidence to prove that she is not liable to pay for the additional current consumption from 8/2000 to 12/2000. The meter readings prove that complainant is liable to pay charges for 266.6 units each for 5 months.<br /> Meter reading 12/2000 - 2654<br /> Meter reading 7/2000 - 1321<br /> --------<br /> Consumption for 5 months - 1333<br /> =====<br /> Average consumption per month = 1333/5 = 266.6 units<br /> <br /> Thus complainant is liable to pay charges for 266.6 units each for 5 months. Opposite party has calculated Rs.1989.30/- as charges for the above consumption of electricity. On going through the calculation we find it incorrect. The amount payable is as follows:<br /> Consumption per month = 1333/5 = 266.6 units<br /> Charges for 1st 200 units (0.70 paise) = 200 x 0.70 = 140.00<br /> Charges for next 200 units (1.10 paise) = 66 x 1.10 = 73.70<br /> ----------<br /> Current charges for 266.6 units = 213.70<br /> Current charges for 5 months = 213.70 x 5 = 1068.50<br /> Less amount of Rs.459/- (already paid<br /> under Provisional Invoice Card = 459.00 <br /> ------------<br /> Current charges = 609.50<br /> =======<br /> Thus the amount payable as additional current charges from 8/2000 to 12/2000 for 1333 units is Rs.609.50/- only and not Rs.1989/-. For the above reasons complainant is not liable to pay Rs.1989/-. We find that the act of opposite party in issuing incorrect bill and demanding excess charges is deficiency in service.<br /> 7. In the result, complaint allowed and the disputed bill for Rs.1989/- dated, 06-3-01 payable by 26-3-2001 for the period from 8/2000 to 12/2000 stands cancelled. Complainant shall pay Rs.609.50/- as additional current charges for the period from 8/2000 to 12/2001 within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In the circumstances there is no order as to costs. Dated this 7th day of February, 2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> K.T.SIDHIQ, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil <br /> Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A3<br /> Ext.A1 : Photo copy of the Order in O.P.No.261/01 dated, <br /> 18-6-2003 pronounced by this Forum.<br /> Ext.A2 : Photo copy of the Version filed by opposite party in <br /> O.P.No.261/01 <br /> Ext.A3 : Photo copy of the bill dated, 26-4-2001 for Rs.448/-<br /> Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1 <br /> Ext.B1 : Photo copy of the Judgement in W.P.(C)No.33359 of 2005 U dated, 22-12-2005.<br /> <br /> <br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> K.T.SIDHIQ, MEMBER<br />