Orissa

Cuttak

CC/132/2018

Mamata Mallick - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chief Executive Officer,Central Electricity Supply Utility - Opp.Party(s)

R K Pattanaik & associates

04 Jan 2023

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                                                C.C.No.132/2018

 

Mamata Mallick,

W/O:ShriSidheswar Mallik,

Res. Of Plot No.1348/12-C,

Sector-VI,CDA,Markatnagar,Cuttack-14,

Town/Dist:Cuttack.                                                                                           ... Complainant.

 

                                                             Vrs.

1.  Central Electricity Supply Utility,

Represented by its Chief Executive Officer,IInd Floor,

IDCO Toer,Janpath,Bhubaneswar&Dist:Khruda.

 

        2.      Executive Engineer,CESU Central Distribution Division(I),

               Ranihat,Town & Dist-Cuttack

 

3.       Assistant Engineer(SDO),CESU,  Markat Nagar,CDA,Sector-6,

Town &Dist:Cuttack.                                                                                   .... Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:    Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                    Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.

 

   Date of filing:     26.12.2018

Date of Order:    04.01.2023

 

For the complainant:           Mr. R.K.Pattnaik,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps.               :         Mr. D.Ray,Adv. & Associates.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President. 

          Case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition in short is that she has two separate electrical meters installed at her house at Sector-6,C.D.A,Cuttack upon plot no.1348/12C.  On 5.1.18 the meter bearing consumer no.00624026 was found to be defective and accordingly she was advised by the O.Ps to install a new meter within 7 days.  A new meter was thus installed in the month of February.  The complainant further alleges that the bill which was paid by her for the month of December,2017 was shown as outstanding against both the meters having consumer no.00745614 and 00624026. Inspite of pointing the said mistake, the same has not been rectified by the O.Ps.  The complainant had  written to the Executive Engineer of the O.Ps in this aspect on 24.5.18 but no result had yielded.Again on 1.11.18 the complainant had reissued letters in this context to the Executive Engineer of the O.Ps.  As a matter of protest the complainant had not paid the bill amount from October,2018 onwards for which on 13.12.18 the O.Ps had disconnected power supply from both of her meters without intimating her earlier to that.  When she met the Asst. Engineer of the O.Ps, she was asked to pay the full amount lying arrear against her two meters after which her electrical line would be reconnected.  Accordingly, the complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.12,276/- against the consumer no.00745614 and a sum of Rs.2389/- against her consumer no.00624026. She also had deposited a sum of Rs.150/- towards her reconnection charge.  The complainant through her complaint petition has urged that though she had deposited the reconnection fee at 12.30 P.M., her electrical line was reconnected that day at 9.45 P.M for which she had to suffer for nine hours without electricity.  She has urged that the O.Ps had not served her any notice 15 days prior the said disconnection.  As such, she has come up with this case before this Commission seeking from the O.Ps a sum of Rs.5000/- towards the excessive billing, a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards the loss of her profession as an advocate, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards her mental agony, a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of her time and social dignity and prestige and also a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards her litigation expenses.

          Alongwith her complaint petition she has filed copies of certain documents in order to prove her case.

2.       The O.Ps have all contested this case and have filed their written version together.  According to the written version of the O.Ps, the bills raised against a consumer is totally computerised and the mistakes therein if found, were only  inadvertently committed as a result of wrong command given.  When on verification it was noticed that due to wrong command an amount of Rs.3193/- was entered mistakenly against the meter reading of the complainant, the same amount was credited against consumer no.00624026 in the month of September,2018 which is reflected in the electrical bill of the complainant in the month of Octgober,2018.  The complainant was called by the O.Ps to produce the original money receipt for reconsideration of the anomaly in consumer no.00745614 relating to her other meter,but the complainant had not responded to such request of the O.Ps.  Though the complainant was given rebate of Rs.13.40p, she had not availed the same by depositing the bill within due period and rather had made a delayed payment for which she had to pay a sum of Rs.215/- towards surcharge for delayed payment.  Thus, the O.Ps have prayed to dismiss the complaint petition it being not maintainable.

          In order to justify their stand, the O.Ps have filed copies of certain documents alongwith their written version.

3.            Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of the written version of O.Ps, this Commission thinks it proper to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a proper conclusion.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by her?

Issues no.II.

Out of the three issues, issues no.ii  being the pertinent issue is taken up  first for consideration here in this case.

As it appears that the complainant has been provided by the O.Ps of this case two electrical meters to her residence and there were inadvertent mistakes in the energy bills for which the complainant had agitated and had written many a times to the Executive Engineer of the O.Ps.  The plea of the O.Psin this context is that though it is computerised billing system adhered to  by them, at times due to wrong command certain inadvertent mistakes occurred which when detected is immediately rectified.  Accordingly, when the mistake in the billing of the complainant in her consumer meter bearing no.00624026 was detected, the same was rectified and credit of Rs.3193/- was shown asin the subsequent electric bill of Ocgtober,2018.  The contention of the O.Ps as regards to the mistake in the bill of the meter bearing consumer no.00745614 is that the complainant was advised by them to produce the original money receipt in order to rectify the same but the complainant had never turned up.  In this context while probing into the copies of available documents here in this case, wherein it is found out that there is a copy of letter addressed to the complainant by the Asst. Manager(Commercial),Sub-Division no.6,C.D.A,Cuttack dt.6.8.18 asking her to produce the original money-receipt alongwith a photo copy of it for verification and record purpose but there is no document filed from the side of the O.Ps apprising this Commission to come to a conclusion that infact the said letter was duly served upon the complainant of this case and that after getting the said letter, the complainant hadnot cooperated with the O.Ps.  In absence of such, this Commission can never jump up to a conclusion that infact the consumer/complainant was intimated by the O.Ps to approach them with the original money receipt showing anomaly in the consumer bill pertaining to consumer meter no.00745614.

When the mistake as it appears was from the side of the OPs here in this case, since because the wrong command as they say, resulted in reflecting the excess outstanding amount against the complainant which was subsequently detected by them against one of the two consumer meters of the complainant and they had shown the excess amount as a credit in favour of the complainant.  But as regards to the excess amount in respect of consumer meter bearing no.00745614, they had simply filed a copy of a letter addressed to the complainant asking her to produce the original money receipt alongwith signed xerox copy of it for verification.  The O.Ps have not proved  that the said letter was duly served upon the complainant of this case.  Thus, when the dispute persisted and the complainant stopped paying the energy dues with a view to rectify the same, disconnection of both of her power supply connections as made by the O.Pshere in this case, appears to be arbitrarily made without any application of mind.  Thus, this Commission finds gross deficiency in the service of the O.Ps towards the complainant here in this case.  Accordingly, this issue goes in favour of the complainant.

            Issues no.i& iii.

From the discussions as made above, the case of the complainant is maintainable and the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as made by her.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                    ORDER

Case is decreed on contest against the O.Ps who are found to be jointly and severally liable here in this case.  Thus, the O.Ps are directed to pay Rs.50,000/- to the complainant as compensation towards her mental agony and harassment alongwith a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards her cost of litigation and to rectify the persisting defect in calculation of the energy dues in the consumer meter of the complainant bearing no.00745614 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 4^th  day of January,2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission.       

                                                                                                                                Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President

                                                                                                                                                                   Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                         Member