Orissa

Kendrapara

CC/86/2015

Bishnu Hari Jena - Complainant(s)

Versus

Executive Engineer(CESU) - Opp.Party(s)

Ranjan Kumar Panda

21 Oct 2016

ORDER

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
KENDRAPARA, ODISHA
 
Complaint Case No. CC/86/2015
 
1. Bishnu Hari Jena
S/o- Late Jivan Jena At/Po- Suniti Ps- Mahakalpada
kendrapara
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Executive Engineer(CESU)
At/Po/Ps- Marshaghai
kendrapara
Odisha
2. Assistant Engineer(CESU)
At/Po/Ps- Mahakalapada
kendrapara
Odisha
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Sri B.K. Das PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. sri Nayananda Das MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Rajashree Agarwalla MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:Ranjan Kumar Panda, Advocate
For the Opp. Party: None, Advocate
Dated : 21 Oct 2016
Final Order / Judgement

MRS.RAJASHREE AGARWALLA,MEMBER:

                           Deficiency in service in respect of providing inflated monthly energy bills are the allegations arrayed against ops.

2.                                  Complaint, in brief reveals that complainant is a domestic category of consumer under Ops bearing consumer No.- 02505586 and was paying the monthly energy dues regularly. The average consumption of electricity per month was Rs. 30/- to 50/-. But the ops on the month of April 2011 served the monthly energy bill to the tune of Rs. 20,7421/-. It is also stated that prior to April 2011 the meter reading was 342 units but the ops wrongly placed ‘5’ in the left side of the actual units consumer, which reflected as ‘5342’ units. Thereafter on the subsequent monthly energy bills upto October-2015 , Ops charged a meagre amount of Rs. 40/ to 50/- basing on the actual consumption, but did not rectify the abrupt monthly bill of April-2011, which gives serious mental agony to the complainant. The last cause of action arose on 5/11/2015 when the Ops turned down the request of the complainant to rectify the energy bill, for which the complainant before the Forum with prayer that a direction may be given to Ops to correct the illegal arbitrary bill entered on the month of April-2011 to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- and odd with a compensation of Rs.10,000/- for mental agony.

3.            Though Notice was served to Ops by regd. Post with due acknowledgement and postal A.D. is a part of the record but the Ops did not prefer to appear on to the dispute, hence set-exparte.

                Heard the ex-parte submissions advanced by Ld. Counsel for complainant perused the Xerox copies of monthly energy bill of April-2011 which reflects that Rs. 20,700/-has been imposed on the complainant-consumer which continues till date. Prior to April-2011, i.e, March-2011 there is no outstanding dues and the monthly energy charges is Rs. 42/-. It also appears from the monthly energy bill of April-2011 when it is mentioned that the units consumed on the month of March-2011 and the meter reading was taken on 23/3/11 showing the electric consumption was 371 units as per actual consumption. But the meter reading taken on 21/04/2011 reflects that the energy consumption is 5321 units. We failed to appreciate that how a domestic category of consumer can use ‘4950’ units in a month. The energy bill for the month of April-2011 creates confusion and ambiguity. Further in the absence of Ops the reasons of abnormal excess billing for the disputed month April-2011 is not ascertained. More so the present proceeding is non-rebuttal in nature. Hence we accept the prayer of the complainant and direct the Ops to withdraw the bill amount reflected in the monthly energy bill of 2011.                                                                                                   

          Accordingly, it is directed Ops will withdraw the bill amount of Rs.20,700/- reflected in the monthly energy bill of complainant bearing consumer No.- 02505586 which according to us is an arbitrary bill and after correction of the energy bill a revised energy bill is to be served to the complainant within one month of receipt of this order, failing which Rs. 50/- will be charged per day for the delayed period.

               

              The complainant is allowed on part on ex-parte without any cost.

 

         Pronounced today in the open Court this 21stth day of October,2016.

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sri B.K. Das]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. sri Nayananda Das]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Rajashree Agarwalla]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.