SRI JIBAN KRUSHNA BEHERA, MEMBER (I/C)
The complainant has filed this complaint petition, U/s.35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (here-in- after called as the “Act”) alleging deficiency-in-service against the Opposite Parties claiming compensation.
2. The case of the complainant, in short, is that the complainant is a domestic consumer under the Ops bearing A/c No.11221008993 having contract load of 1.00 KW. The complainant used to pay the dues of electricity regularly. But suddenly on 6.2.2023, the Ops have threatened to disconnect the power supply to his house without intimation. Hence, this case.
3. In the present case, OP No.1 neither appeared nor filed his version, for which he was set ex parte. Ops No.2 to 5 made their appearance and filed their joint version admitting the consumership of the complainant under them and stated, inter alia, that the meter of the complainant was in order till March, 2010 and billing was done accordingly. Due to non-payment of monthly dues, an amount of Rs.19,233.10 paisa was due against him. Thereafter, the meter became defective from April, 2010 and as per tariff the billing was done on loan factor basis till October, 2019. New meter was installed on 4.11.2020, but the meter reading was taken in April, 2021 after Covid-19 which was 2198 units. So, the average consumption was calculated which comes to 123 units per month. Further, the entire load factor bills from April, 2010 to March, 2021 has been revised @ 123 units and an amount of Rs.6,185.92 was exempted and after payment of Rs.23,000/- by the complainant, an amount of Rs.62,782/- up to February, 2023 is due on him, which the complainant is bound to pay. Hence, they have prayed to dismissed the case with cost.
4. In view of the above pleading of both the parties, the points for determination in this case are as follows:-
(i) Whether the complainant is a consumer or not?
(ii) Whether the complainant has cause of action to file this case?
(iii) Whether this consumer case is maintainable?
(iv) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs?
(v) Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief, as sought for?
(vi) To what other relief(s), the Complainant is entitled to?
F I N D I N G S
5. On perusal of the documents filed on behalf of the complainant, it is found that the complainant used to pay the dues of electricity to the Ops till March, 2022 and obtained money receipts from them. On the other hand, Ops claimed that the meter of the complainant was found defective from April, 2010 and new meter was installed on 4.11.2020 and meter reading was taken in April, 2021 and on the average basis of 123 units per month, the bill from April, 2010 to March, 2021 was revised. Further, an amount of Rs.6,185.92 paisa has been exempted from the total outstanding and after adjustment of payments of Rs.23,000/- by the complainant, the outstanding balance was 62,782/- up to February, 2023.
6. From the above rival assertions, it is clear from the revision statement in respect of the bills that the defective meter was replaced on 4.11.2019 and up to April, 2021 total consumption of unit was held to be 2198 Kwh and so, the average consumption per month was calculated to 123 units. So, the bill from April, 2010 to March, 2021 has been revised basing on the 123 units per month. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.6,185.92 paisa was exempted, but it has not been reflected in the revised bill. If that be so, as it is seen the total outstanding dues comes to Rs.62,782/-. As it is seen from the case record, the complainant had deposited Rs.20,000/- towards outstanding electricity dues in view of the order passed by this Commission vide order dated 21.02.2023. Therefore, the complainant is required to pay a sum of Rs.36,596/- to the Ops. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the complainant is a rustic villager and he has no capacity to repay the outstanding at a time and thus, he may be permitted to repay the outstanding electricity dues in 10 equal monthly instalments. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submission made on behalf of the complainant, it is directed that the complainant should repay the outstanding dues to the Ops in 4 (four) equal monthly instalments.
7. In the light of the discussions made above, it is held that the complainant has no cause of action to file the case and the case is not maintainable. Consequently, he is not entitled to any relief what-so-ever as claimed in the complaint.
Hence, it is ordered -
O R D E R
The case of the complainant be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OPs No.2 to 5 and on ex parte against OP No.1. No order as to costs.
Pronounced in the open court of this Commission, this the 18th day of November, 2024 under my signature & seal of the Commission.
