Brief fact of this case is that, the complainant Balabhadra Naik is the son of Original Consumer Maheswar Naik vide Elect. Consumer I.D. No.621171022000016M5265. After death of original consumer the OP supplied the electric bill after eight months amounting to Rs.17,228.00. Again after another month the bill has came to Rs.19,022.00 then on dt. 21.08.2022 the electric bill came about Rs.710.14. the total amount of  the bill is about Rs.19,732.14. That the OP has neglected by not giving the electric bill since eight months. The electric bill has not properly calculated and harassed the complainant. The complainant prayed before the Hon’ble Commission for exemption of such amount charged by TPNODL, the OP.

The petitioner relies upon the following documents.

1. Photocopy of bills.
2. Legal heir certificate.
3. Under the above complain the case was admitted and notice issued to Op. The Op appeared and filed their written version in detail. In their written version the Op stated that this case is not maintainable against the OP in the eye of law. That this case is mis-joinder and non-joinder of party. There is no cause of action to bring this false case against the OP. So far as the averment made in para 1 of the complaint is concerned, it is false to say that the consumer No. of Maheswar Naik is 621171022000016M5265 but the actual consumer No is 621113090065. So the complainant will strictly  prove this. The averment made in para-3 & 4 of the complaint are false and fabricated. That true fact is that, the power supply had been disconnected in the month of April 2021. during disconnection the meter reading was 15,400 KWh in meter Sl.No.NES15134. The power supply was reconnected in the month of September-2021 and initial meter reading found 15,400KWh with the said meter No. So the bill generated after reconnection and final reading found 18,575 KWh and the Units 3175(10months) has been calculated in the energy bill and till date the same meter is continuing with actual billing. That as per standing verdict, this type of case should be filed before the G.R.P.(Grievance Redressal Forum).Under the above circumstances, the complainant petition is liable to be disposed having devoid of merits.

The OP relies upon the following documents:

1. Nil.

On the above pleadings the following issues are framed to decide the case.

1. Whether the case is maintainable?
2. Whether any cause of action arises on this case?
3. Whether Op has made any deficiency of service?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief sought for?

                                        FINDINGS

                     The case is filed for billing dispute against the Op. The complainant says that the OP has not properly calculated the bill without giving proper intimation which shocked mentally to the complainant. It is a general verdict that dispute regarding billing should be filed before the G.R.F. (Grievance Redressal Forum). So this commission lacks jurisdiction to decide the case.  In the above circumstances the case is not maintainable. In the present situation the complainant can file his complaint before the G.R.F.

ORDER

                 The complaint case being devoid on merits is dismissed without any cost.