DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: BHADRAK

Dated the 18th day of April, 2019

C.D Case No. 41 of 2018

                                                   Present 1. Shri Raghunath Kar, President

                                                                2. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Member

                                                                3. Afsara Begum, Member

Morad Ali Khan

S/o: Late Murshid Ali Khan

Vill: Chhadak Mohalla,

Po/Ps: Purunabazar,

Dist: Bhadrak

                                                        ……………………. Complainant

            (Versus)

1. Executive Engineer Electrical, NESCO UTILITY, BNED

Bhadrak Sub-Division-1

At; By-pass,

Po/Ps/Dist: Bhadrak

2. S.D.O, Electrical, NESCO UTILITY, BNED

Bhadrak- 1,

At: By-pass,

Po/Ps/Dist: Bhadrak (R)

                                                          …………………………..Opp. Parties

Counsel For Complainant: Mr. Gopinath Dash, Adv   

Counsel For the O.Ps:  Mr. Debasis Nayak, Adv

Date of hearing: 25.01.2019

Date of order: 18.04.2019

BASANTA KUMAR MALLICK, MEMBER

This dispute arises out of the complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.

The facts of the complaint are to the effect that the complainant is the son of a deceased consumer of electricity under the O.Ps and have been consuming electricity on payment of bill dues regularly. After the demise of the consumer Mursid Ali Khan, his sons had been residing in the premises and also had been paying the energy bill. Late Mursid Ali Khan of Chhadak Mohalla is survived by four sons out of which younger 3 sons have been staying away of their parental house in order to earn their livelihood and therefore only the eldest son Morad Ali Khan is residing in his parental thatched house consisting of 3 rooms  together with his family since then. After demise of his father, the complainant has been paying the energy bills according to the bills communicated by the electricity Dept. it is ascertained that the average consumption of the energy remains within 60 to 80 units per month. The complainant became amazed when he received the energy bill on 10.02.2018 demanding an arrear of Rs 1,39,636/- and rushed to the office of O.Ps to lodge complain and requested to revise the bill but the O.Ps, instated of revising the bill, went on charging the arrears in successive months which went on mounting up to Rs 1,39,636/- till the month of January, 2018. Such a big amount charged by the O.Ps is unrealistic and inflated that caused anxiety and mental agony for the complainant. Due to nonpayment of arrear bills the O.Ps also sent a disconnection notice and subsequently disconnected the power supply to the premises of the complainant on 15.03.2018 without providing sufficient scope and opportunity to the complainant to arrange payment of energy dues in part. Under such a situation the complainant, finding no other alternative and for immediate remedy filed this dispute in this Forum praying for a direction to the O.Ps to restore the power supply to the premises of the complainant till final disposal of this case and also prayed to direct the O.Ps to revise the arrear bills from 2001 on the actual consumption basis.

O.Ps objected the allegations of the complainant and contested the case. In submitting the written version O.Ps have raised the question of maintainability of this case on the ground of barred by limitation as the complainant has admitted in his pleadings that he has received the arrear bill for Rs 23,199/- during the month of December, 2007 and since then complainant has never taken any remedial measure on this score and has also admitted to have paid Rs 13,000/- only from 2007 to 2018, during these 11 years, including the current energy dues. The O.Ps have further raised that the energy meter installed in the premises of the complainant is running in good condition till the date of filing of this case but the complainant has taken false plea about the problem in the meter for which it is not running properly as a result of which the units consumed shown by the meter is much more than what is actually consumed. But the actual fact remains that the O.Ps have submitted the bill on basis of actual reading of the meter installed which was not opposed or objected by the complainant and accordingly they have served the notice on the complainant for disconnection of power supply to his premises and practically have disconnected power supply due to nonpayment of arrear bills.

Admittedly the father of the complainant was a consumer under the O.Ps and after demise of the recorded consumer the complainant has inherited the said consumer number and has been consuming energy uninterruptedly till the date of disconnection of power supply and by virtue of an interim order issued by this Forum the power supply to the premises of the complainant was restored. The important issues involved in this case are categorically discussed here under to draw the conclusion of this case.

1. It is pertinent to mention here that the O.Ps have focused on the point of barred by limitation stating that the cause of action arose in the month of January, 2008 when the O.Ps communicated the arrear bill for an amount of Rs 23,199/- which is admitted by the complainant at Para- 3 of the complaint petition. Since them the O.Ps have been communicating the regular bills which are reflecting the arrear amount at an increasing rate in the successive months but whatever payment has been tendered by the complainant in a continual manner was not adequate to cover the current bills of the respective months. The complainant has neither made an appeal to the O.Ps for a revision nor made any correspondence with the O.Ps during these 11 years and preferred a dispute in the D.C.D.R.F Bhadrak when the answering O.Ps disconnected the power supply to the premises of the complainant. On the other hand the complainant raised that the O.Ps could have taken such an action in the year 2007 when the arrear amount as was reflecting in the bill for the month of 2007 was not paid by the complainant and kept quiet for a period of more than 10 years which indicates the gross negligence of the O.Ps. It is nothing but the only truth that due to callous and careless action of O.Ps the arrear dues went on mounting to a big amount which went beyond of capacity of the complainant to pay at a go and resulted in disconnection of power supply to the premises of the complainant. Hence the mounting arrear is the outcome of the gross negligence of O.Ps for which the complainant became a victim to the whimsical action of the O.Ps.

Heard the parties to this case, went through the complaint and written version, perused the relevant materials on record and observed that the O.Ps have communicated arrear bill on 19.01.2008 which is meant for December, 2007 and in this manner the O.Ps have been communicating the bills till 2018 without taking any concrete step towards recovery of the arrear dues. This inaction of the O.Ps led to mounting of arrear dues which went beyond affordability of the complainant and consequently O.Ps disconnected power supply to the premises of the complainant. It is therefore held that the O.Ps have grossly neglected in their legitimate duties which is equivalent to deficiency of service. Hence the concept of barred by limitation as raised by the O.Ps does not hold good in this context.

2. Secondly the complainant has raised that he has been staying in a thatched house consisting of three rooms and the average units of power consumed over a prolonged period was approximately 80 units and if such units shall be taken into account, the average amount of bill would  not be more than Rs 300/- per month including all other charges but the O.Ps have charged exorbitantly at their sweet will showing the average consumption exceeding 300 units per month in average which is unfair and illegal. It is pertinent to mention here that the meter installed in the premises has become out of order before 2007 but the O.Ps did not take any step to install a new meter in the premises of the complainant as a result of which said meter is running abnormally showing inflated units consumed and relying on which the bills have been prepared. On the contrary the O.Ps have denied on the point of defunct meter and claimed the said meter has been functioning smoothly and properly till date and the bills have been prepared according to meter reading. Hence the amount of arrear mentioned in the bills are 100% genuine and correct. In challenging the submission of the O.Ps complainant submitted in stating that the bill statement furnished by the O.Ps clearly indicates that the meter was defunct for a pretty long period and the bills have been prepared on load factor which is denied by the O.Ps. The O.ps claimed that the bill prepared on load factor was due to closer of the premises and the meter reader could not find entry to the premises to take the reading of the meter. It is worth mentioning that although the family members of the complainant were inside the premises did not open the gate to enter to the premises to take the reading of the meter. Therefore it can firmly said that the complainant has taken false plea not to pay the arrear amount to the O.Ps.

From the aforesaid analysis and perusal of records it is observed that due to gross negligence and failure in providing timely service by the O.Ps to the complainant, the amount of arrear bill has been mounted up over a period of time and the amount of arrear has gone beyond the affordability of the complainant and the bill statement exhibits the meter installed in the premises of the complainant was out of order. Hence it is ordered;

ORDER

The complaint be and the same is allowed without cost. The O.Ps are directed to revise the energy bill with effect from, 2001 and communicate the revised bill to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. Further the complainant is also directed to pay the revised arrear amount within 15 days from the date of receipt of the arrear bill from the O.Ps or else the bills communicated by the O.Ps on 18.02.2018 shall stand valid.

This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 18th April, 2019 under my hand and seal of the Forum.