Heard learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondent. During course of hearing learned counsel for the appellant produced the copy of the verification report, assessment and final assessment order.
2. This appeal is filed U/S-15 of erstwhile Consumer Protection Act,1986(herein-after called the Act). Hereinafter, the parties to this appeal shall be referred to with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum.
3. The case of the complainant, in nutshell is that complainant was a consumer under the OP. It is alleged inter-alia that the OP issued revised bill for the period from 1/2000 to 10/2000 and 06/2002 to 9/2003 taking average bill for the period 10/99,11/99 and 12/99. Thereafter disconnection notice was issued to OP No.1 demanding Rs.91,230/-. Thereafter one disconnection notice was issued showing arrear of Rs.69,67/-. Again a notice was issued for payment of 1,26,217/-. The OP installed a new meter on 26.08.2002 and thereafter bill was prepared. The complainant alleged that he is not liable to pay any bill. Hence, filed complaint.
4. The OP filed written version stating that on load factor basis, from 1/2000 to 10/2000 and 6/2002 to 9/2003, the bill was raised. It is case of the OP that on the basis of load factor, the bill was prepared as alleged by the complainant but the bill was charged for meter rent but not for supply of energy from 1/2000 to 10/2000 and 6/2002 to 9/2003. They state that bill has been revised and there are nothing to do. The disconnection notice was issued to the complainant because he did not pay the amount as charged. It is stated that they have verified the electric consumption of the complainant on 30.03.2005 and found that the complainant was using electricity by hooking process. Thereafter formalities were completed and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP.
5. After hearing both the parties, learned District Forum passed the following order:-
Xxxx xxxx xxxx
“ The complaint petition is allowed in part on contest without cost. The OPs are directed to tender the correct bill by deducting the bill amount already paid by the complainant and the period covered under C.D.Case No.8/03 on the bills of receipt of correct amount or the bill amount which ever is convenient to the complainant, the electric line can be restored to the premises of the P.W.1. This arrangement is to be completed within a period of three months from the date of this order, failing in which the complainant is at liberty to take proper action against the OPs through execution proceeding. This case and connected Misc.Case are disposed of.”
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is illegal and improper because the bill has been already revised and new meter has been installed and on verification the complainant was using electricity by hooking process and action U/S-126 of the Indian Electricity Act,2003 has been initiated against the complainant to collect the penal bill. Learned District Forum, without understanding the facts and law has passed the impugned order, which should be set-aside by allowing the appeal.
7. Considered the submission of learned counsel for the appellant, perused the DFR and impugned order.
8. The only question arises in this case whether the complainant is liable to pay arrears and proved the deficiency in service on the part of the OP. It is admitted fact that the complainant is a consumer under the OP and he has used the electricity on load factor basis upto 2003 but subsequently new meter has been installed. During course of hearing learned counsel for the appellant produced the verification report, penal bill and final assessment which clearly established that the complainant was using electricity on 30.03.2005 by hooking process and as such they have imposed penal bill for Rs.15,484/- and thereafter the penal assessment bill was issued and action U/S-126 of the Indian Electricity Act,2003 has been initiated against him. These facts are not produced by the complainant before the learned District Forum. Therefore, the complainant is in guilty of suppression of material fact about filing of case U/S-126 of the Act. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in U.P.Power Corporation Ltd.-Vrs-Anis Ahamed AIR 2013 SC -2766 where the consumer complaint held is not maintainable. With due regard to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court and taking the facts and circumstances of the case the impugned order passed by the learned District Forum is set-aside as consumer complaint is not maintainable.So, it is set-aside.
Appeal stands allowed. No cost.
Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the confonet or webtsite of this Commission to treat same as copy of order received from this Commission.
DFR be sent back forthwith.
