JUDGMENT

Shri A.K.Patra,President 

The facts of the complaint in brief are  that, the complainant is a consumer of Opposite Parties vide Consumer No.903612120209 and meter no. WLT 0970605 . The complainant has received bill on 08.03.2022 of Rs.1073/- for 206 units with an arrear amount of Rs.1665.98. The complainant has paid the bill amount of Rs.1073/- vide M.R. No.89141013298202202 dt.11.03.2022.  The complainant  is paying the bills as per the meter reading since long having no arrear dues and suddenly  the electricity bill showing arrear amount of Rs.1665.98  is wrong  which the complainant  strongly objected .It is submitted that the OPs are not vigilant enough to issue correct bill to the complainant as per the meter reading and are issuing bills wrongly without any reason showing inflated arrear amount in the bill which is liable to be waived as per law .The complainant approached the ops for revision of the alleged bill but it was not responded . Hence this complainant  alleging negligence & deficiency in service on the part of the Ops

The complainant prayed for an order directing the opposite party to deduct the claim arrear amount of Rs.1665.98/- in the bill dt.08.03.2022 and further pray for a compensation of rs.50,000/-towards mental agony and physical suffering caused due to negligence and deficiency in service on the part of O.ps further pray for a direction to the O.P to issue bill as per meter reading in each month regularly and the O.P be directed to restrain form issuing of wrong bill showing any arrear to the complainant rather to issue proper bill as per meter reading.

Notice along with complaint petition & documents relied by the complainant is properly served to the O.Ps vide vide notice No.85 dt.26.05.2020 as it revels from the peon kook of this office but the O.P did not appeared to contest the  case of the complainant though several opportunity has been given. The complainant present in person today and filed his evidence on affidavit as prescribed under C. P. Act 2019 .Ops found absent on call as such heard the complainant present  ex-parte in absence of ops .

Here the doctrine of non –traverse will rightly applicable as non of the allegation made by the complainant are ever disputed or traversed by the O.P in any manner .The opposite party have neither    disputed nor produce any evidence contrary to the averment of the complainant which in terms is a clear admission of facts of the complaint and the same need not proved as per Sec 58 of Indian evidence Act. Law is well settled that  every allegation of facts in the complaint if not denied specifically or by necessary implication , or stated to be admitted in the pleading of the O.P shall be taken to be admitted accept as against a person disability . Where the O.p has not filed a pleading it shall be law full for the court to pronounced judgment on the basic of the fact contend in the plaint except as against the person under a disability (Reliance placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in  M.Venkataramana Hebbar Vs M. Rajagopal Hebbar & Others, Lohia Properties (P) Ltd Vs. Atmaram Kumar).

Perused the material available on record. Complainant has alleged negligence & deficiency of service on the part of Ops for  their erroneous  bill of Rs.1665.98/- dt.08.03.2022. Law is well settled that, complainant is to prove deficiency in service as alleged against the Ops

As per Sec.38(6) of C.P.Act,2019 every complaint shall be heard by the District Commission on the basis of affidavit and documentary evidence placed on record ; as such it casts an obligation on the District Commission to decide the complaint on the basis of evidence brought to its notice by the complainant and the service provider/seller, irrespective of whether the service provider/seller adduced evidence or not. The decision of the District Commission has to be based on evidence relied upon by the complainant. The onus thus is on the complainant making allegation.

Peruse the material available on record. The complainant present and filed his  evidence on affidavit contents of which are corroborate with the averment of the complainant petition hence, the complainant has prove his case. He also proved the alleged bill dt.08.03.2022 & the money receipt dt.11.03.2022 annexed with his complaint petition.

In the light of above said discussion and settled principle of law and on being prove the allegation made against the O.Ps, we are of the considered view that, there is deficiency in service on the part of O.P towards the complainant for non taking of regular meter reading and issuing of wrong bill dt.08.03.2022 demanding arrear amount of Rs.1665.98/- which certainly caused financial hardship and mental agony to the complainant as such he is entitle to be compensated by the O.Ps. However the claim of the complainant is of higher side as such allowed in part. Hence it is order.

ORDER

 The O.Ps are directed to deducted the arrear amount of Rs 1,665.98 as it is demanded in the alleged bill dt. 08.03.2022 and further directed to pay Rs.5,000/- compensation to the complainant towards mental agony and financial hardship suffered  due to negligence &  deficient  service on their part towards the complainant .

The Ops is further directed to  comply the order within four weeks from the date of received of this order failing which the Ops are liable to pay Rs 500/-per day to the complainant till compliance of this order. This consumer Complain is partly allowed in above terms against Ops ex-parte. Pending application if any is also stands disposed off.

 Dictated and corrected by me.

            President

I   agree.

 Member    

Pronounced in open Commission today on this   29 th March 2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission.

Copy of this judgment be provided to the parties free of cost .The judgment be uploaded forth with on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.