PER SHRI.S.M.SHEMBOLE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER
Challenge in this appeal is the judgment and order dated 24/04/2007 passed by District Consumer Forum, Akola in CC No.54/2004.
Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that the complainant/Respondent is a consumer of appellant/Opponent MSEDCL having consumer No.31007701136642 since the year 1991. According to the complainant/Respondent, he regularly paid the electricity charges as per bill issued by the appellant. In the year 1999, as electric meter was burnt. Therefore, on getting deposited the amount of Rs.1000/- new meter was installed. Thereafter, again in the year 2002 the meter was changed. However, instead of issuing bills as per meter reading, the appellant issued average bills. Thereafter on 17/1/2004, the appellant issued a bill for 56 months of Rs.83050/-. The complainant has challenged the same before the District Consumer Forum.
Opponent/appellant resisted the complaint by filing written version contending therein that as average bill was issued for 56 months and after receipt of the meter replacement report, the disputed bill was issued. According to the appellant, the average bill was issued legally, but in order to avoid the same, the complainant has filed this complaint. On these grounds, it is submitted to dismiss the complaint.
On hearing both the sides and considering the evidence on record, the District Consumer Forum allowed the complaint cancelling the disputed bill of Rs.83050/- and directed the appellant board to issue fresh bill as per consumption, and further directed the appellant board to pay Rs.5000/- to the complainant/Respondent towards compensation and Rs.1000/- as cost of the proceeding.
Feeling aggrieved by that judgment and order, the opponent has filed this appeal.
We heard counsel for the appellant, perused the copy of judgment and order and other documents produced on record. However, as the Respondent and his counsel are absent, we have no opportunity to hear them.
Mr.Deshpande, Adv.for the appellant submitted that since the meter replacement report was not received to the billing section, the average bill was issued and on receipt of the said report, fresh bill for Rs.83050/- was legally issued to the complainant, but he failed to pay the bill. Pointing out the letter dated 31/1/2004 issued by the complainant to the appellant, Mr.Deshpande, contended that the complainant had admitted the bill in question.
But we find no force in this submission of Mr.Deshpande. A bare glance at this letter, it manifests that the complainant has specifically disputed the bill in question. But Mr.Deshpande made feeble attempt to mislead this commission contending that the complainant has admitted this bill etc. Mr.Deshpande, learned counsel for the appellant could not give any plausible explanation as to why average bill for 56 months was issued merely on the ground that meter change report was not received. However, he has fairly conceded that meter change report is to be given by the officials of the appellant board only to the billing section, but they have not sent it for 56 months and, therefore, the billing section, on receipt of the report issued bill in question. If it is so, then the board itself is at fault and, therefore, the consumer complainant can not be held responsible for non payment of electric charges when he has regularly paid the average bill issued by the board itself. Considering all these facts, the District Consumer Forum has rightly allowed the complaint. We find no infirmity or any illegality in the impugned order and hence, no interference is warranted.
In the result, the appeal is being devoid of merit deserves to be dismissed summarily.
Hence the order…
ORDER
1) Appeal is dismissed.
2) No order as to cost.
3) Inform the parties accordingly.
Delivered on 14/10/2011.
