Presents:-
1.Sri P.Samantara, President.
2.Smt. S.Rath, Member.
3.Sri G.K.Rath, Member.
Dated, Bolangir the 22nd day of June 2015.
C.C.No.68 of 2011.
- Chamaru Agrawal. Age-68 years son of late Radheshyam Agrawal.
- Smt. Mini Agrawal, age-35 years wife of late Bhikarilal Agrawal.
- Sanjit Kumar Agrawal, age-37 years s/o late Chamaru Agrawal.
All are resident of Tusura, P.O/P.S-Tusura,Dist- Bolangir.
.. .. Complainants.
-Versus-
- Executive Engineer, WESCO, Bolangir,P.O/P.S/Dist-Bolangir.
- S.D.O.Electrical, Sub-Division,WESCO, Bolangir.
- Sectional Officer,WESCO, Tusura, P.O/P.S/Dist- Bolangir.
.. ..
Advocate for the complainants- Sri G.C.Panigrahi & Associates.
Advocate for the O.Ps - Sri J.Mohanty.
Date of filing of the case-19.09.2011
Date of order - 22.06.2015
JUDGMENT.
Sri P.Samantara, President.
The complainant Radheshyam Agrawal was a consumer retaining consumer No.911001060083 under WESCO. Bolangir, In deceased,it subsequently substituted by an application dt.21.06.2011. The complainant died on 04.02.2010 and the legal heirs and successors constitute a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF).
2. The deceased complainant instituted a case bearing Consumer Case No.122/2007 under which it is prayed, the outstanding bill amounting to Rs 97,731/- be not recovered as same is incorrect and not furnished in proper correction. The case was dismissed on default on dt.13.01.2010.The afresh application notes, on dated 14.06.2006 a notice served with the deceased Radheshyam Agrawala and outstanding electricity bill of Rs 97,731/- and to pay the amount on or before 28.06.2006 failing which power will be disconnected u/s.56 of I.E.Act.
3. The complainant also averred, the bill dated 10.06.2006 two nos amount respectively Rs 45,007/- and Rs 51,261/- have been shown outstanding, the levied amount is incorrectly shown and the money receipts of the bills issued is submitted for consideration, which includes a penal amount concerning Rs 34,496/- by inspection of the premises, on dt.19.11.2004. The disputed amount was challenged under C.D.Case No.182/2004. The amount has been quashed under order dated 20.09.2005 and also direction has been made to waive off and same order has not challenged. Similarly the arrear amount of Rs 47,559/- being the incorrect. That the O.P failed to produce material in support of same so actually there is no arrear pending against this petitioner.
4. The petitioner further added the present complainant being the L.Rs and successors of late Radheshyam Agrawala was served with disconnection notice on above noted arrear in afresh on 28.08.2011 which not genuine rather illegal and arbitrary. The deceased and the substituted successors earn their livelihood in exclusively self employed purpose. In violation of the orders by this court which is not tenable in the eyes of the law. The O.Ps forcibly disconnected the electric line and under Misc.case No.38 of 2007 dated 01.12.2007 by the order of the court the electricity line was restored, subject to payment of Rs 5,000/- although line has been restored, the disputed amount has not been deleted from ledger. The above activities caused harassment and mental agony so the O.Ps are liable for compensation and praying for appropriate reliefs.
5. The complainants relied on disconnection notice, Order of CC No.182/2004, Money receipts in original, Copy of Order dt.25.07.2011 in CC 122/2007 and bills issued by WESCO.
6. On being noticed the O.Ps appeared and filed their singled version contending, the petition filed by the complainant is not maintainable as the case was dismissed for default on dt.13.11.2010 . Not preferred any appeal in the next higher forum. The case suffers same cause of action. Moreover the complainants should have approach the competent and higher authority for redressal as it is a case of theft of energy and penalty bill, again the consumer is utilizing the electricity for commercial purpose engaging labourers for his own benefits.
7. The O.Ps also stated the deceased Radheshyam Agrawal was a consumer of O.Ps. The substitution as made is not insured by the document and proof that electricity dues was paid regularly. No prove persists that complainants is the “Karta” of HUF as submitted.
8. The O.P also averred the C.D.Case No.122/2007 is dismissed by this forum for default of the complainant. The consumer was issued with the bill for Rs 97,731/- due to outstanding dues so it attracts disconnection notice as per the law. The issued bills are correct and are tenable in the eyes of the law. It is admitted that the penalty bill of Rs 34,496/- has been waived from the bills and the bill Rs 45,117/- has been claimed as penalty bill due to theft of energy which is legal and genuine. Further an amount of Rs 8,626/- has been claimed for theft of energy on dt. 20.09.2008 as penalty bill with issued on assessment order and final assessment order in communicating to the consumer.
9. Further admitting that power supply was restored to the consumer after deposit of Rs 5,000/- and the deposited amount has been deducted/adjusted in the ledger amount. No question arises of mental agony, torture and prejudice to the interest of consumers. The O.Ps are not liable to pay any compensation as the petitioners have no case against the O.Ps. Praying to dismiss same.
10. Heard the complainant’s counsel and the O.Ps at length. Gone the submitted documents and submission in exhaust and also strenuous arguments at both end. Perused the materials on record.
11. On the instance, the present case is an inclusion and successive application made thereof such as due to dismiss of default and deferred adjustment by the O.Ps end in adjustment of the bill. Prima-facie and it is also no more denial that the substituted complainants are consumer in availing the service of the O.Ps and earning their livelihood in exclusive of self employment.
12. Successive submission both ends speak cases preferred one after another due to various reasons. Present case is arising from the same fact and different dates related cause of action. However it is admitted, the case belongs to nature of incorrect and non adjustment of bills in issuance and post paid.
13. That total contended amounts pleaded by the O.Ps comes to Rs 97,7312/- in outstanding where as the complainants prayed to declare Rs 1,13,589/- outstanding as illegal. but both the admission, the contentious amount is Rs 97,731/- .Out of which Rs 34,496/- admitted to have waived and adjusted in the ledger but the petitioner to deny. The bill issued on 27th Jan 2015 reflects Rs 87,982/- as the arrear due, leaving behind the present electricity charges Rs 2,899/-.Hence as per the order dated 20.09.2005 the amount of Rs 34,496/- to be adjusted flatly without any objection. On the remaining two nos head of penalty charges respectively Rs 45,117/- and Rs 8.626/- on the month Feb 2006 and dt.20.9.2009 the provisional assessment served by the O.Ps.
14. Perusal of provisional assessment order and final assessment order, we find provisional assessment order dated 05.04.2006 relating to consumer No.911001060083/Ind/TSR/11, passed from 9/05 to 2/06 and final assessment amounting to Rs 45,117/- although prayed same has not communicated to the consumer by the prescribed mode of rules and u/s.126(2) of the Act comes to consideration, even not a single paper to have communicated on the same either has received or denied has been placed before this forum.
15. The other provisional assessment orderNo.600 dt.22.092008 and final assessment order No.4777/dt 22.11.2008 charge amounting to Rs 8.,626/- also suffers of same u/s.126(2) and procedure as prescribed under rules. No document produced by the O.P to have received, communicated, served or denied in communication. on observance of same is a defect under assessment head and the consumer can’t be held liable being denied with an opportunity of being heard in person, the scheduled form as prepared unilateral & unacknowledged . The authorized representative denounces the present and no rebuttal evidence has been filed by the O.P. In such a situation and aforementioned finding, we prefer to not to consider the assessment thereby the allegation of theft as believable one. Hence it requires both the amounts as levied be waived in the continuing/running bill that to be going to have issued.
16. We also perused the bills submitted by complainant-consumer and found the bills are paid in various denomination ranging from Rs 3,000/- to Rs 20.000/- paid on dt. 19.03.2005 means the petitioner is obeying the direction issued under Misc.Case No. 38 of 2007,the portion of the order reads “ Further the complainant is also directed to make payment of current charges of each month as per consumption of units of the meter reading, failing which liable for disconnection”. As the petitioner submits, he is paying & we find no inconsistency in compliance of the same order rather disputed amount imposed as arrear is a barrier in clearing of the entire amount. So it requires the bill be submitted in complete adjustment so that the long due arrear can be cleared and bills present be updated without any hitch.
Hence ordered.
We hereby direct the O.Ps to adjust the dues in accurate and furnish the bill to the consumer in up-to-date manner taking the payment of bills paid by the complainant. The amount due as arrear and levied under theft charge has no berth of legitimacy to be collected. Therefore it is directed to waive out the same.
And this forum in conclusion assessed the complaint-consumer as paying regularly and handsomely, so the O.Ps are directed not to disconnect the electricity service till the running bill is paid regularly. The aforesaid order shall be complied by the O.Ps within 30 days of the order, failing which they shall pay @ Rs 10/- per day till compliance. No order as to cost.
ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN FORUM THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2015;
I agree. I agree.
(P.Samantara)
( S.Rath) (G.K.Rath)
MEMBER. MEMBER.
