Orissa

Kendrapara

CC/32/2015

Ashit Kumar Mohanty - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Himself

18 Mar 2017

ORDER

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
KENDRAPARA, ODISHA
 
Complaint Case No. CC/32/2015
 
1. Ashit Kumar Mohanty
S/o- Late Bata Krushna Mohanty At- Madhushasan Po-Gadijanga
Kendrapara
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Executive Engineer,(Electrical) CESU
Marshaghai Division-11 At/Po-Marshaghai
Kendrapara
Odisha
2. Project Manager,
Enzen Global Solution Pvt. Ltd. At-Garapur Po/PS-Kendrapara
Kendrapara
Odisha
3. Junior Engineer(Korua Section)
Enzen Global Solution Pvt. Ltd. At- Korua
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:Himself, Advocate
For the Opp. Party: Pramod Kumar Samal &Associates, Advocate
Dated : 18 Mar 2017
Final Order / Judgement

MRS RAJASHREE AGARWALLA, MEMBER-

             Deficiency in service in respect of providing inflated energy bills and illegal disconnection of power supply are the allegations arrayed against ops.

2.                 Complaint in brief reveals that complainant’s father namely Batakrushna Mohanty is a domestic category of consumer under Ops, bearing consumer No.02115041.  It is stated that after occurrance of super cyclone in the year 1999 the power supply was disrupted and restored after much delay. But the Ops without considering the period of non-supply of electricity served an energy bill showing the arrear outstanding to tune of Rs. 15,122/- as on dtd.  19/03/2015. The Complainant protested before S.D.O., CESU, Marshaghai on dtd. 30/3/2015 by submitting a written application for correction bill, but the Ops instead of correcting the energy bill issued a disconnection Notice and on 30/3/15 disconnected the power supply to the Complainant’s premises. According to Complainant the action of the Ops are deficiency in service which caused mental agony to the Complainant and prayed this Forum for restoration of power supply and revision energy bill and compensation of Rs. 20,000/- for mental agony.

3.                   Being noticed Ops appeared through their ld. Counsel and filed joint written statement stating that Complainant’s father is domestic category of consumer being No.002115041 and the outstanding against the said consumer till Dec-2016 is Rs. 17,789/- and Complainant has never applied for revision of billing at any point of time and not paying any amount towards arrear dues, if the Complainant applies for revision of energy bill the Ops are ready to comply his grievance. In the circumstances the Ops have not committed any deficiency in service and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.                  Heard the Complainant and ld. Counsel for the Op-parties, perused the consumer billing statement filed by Ops and Complainant files photocopy of energy bill, disconnection Notice dtd. 21/01/2015 and copy of the letter addressed to the S.D.O.-cum-Manager, CESU, Marshaghai dtd. 30/03/2015 to support their respective cases. It is an admitted fact that Complainant’s deceased father late Batakrushna Mohanty is a consumer under Ops bearing No. 02115041and Complaint is enjoying power supply on the said consumer No. It is also admitted that a disconnection Notice was issued to Complainant for non-payment of arrear outstandings to the tune of Rs 15,122/- till January-2015. In the Complaint and during course of hearing it is alleged that on occurrance of super cyclone in the year 1999, after 2 and half years the restoration works was completed and power supply restored, after a few months again the transformer of Complainant’s village burnt and same was installed after a long period. But the Ops without considering such periods have imposed erroneous energy bills on the Complainant. On the counter Ops do not speak a single sentence regarding the date of power supply after super cyclone, further do not disclose the period when Complainant-consumer was not availing power supply due to restoration work super cyclone. The consumer billing statement filed by the Ops reflects that the billing statement begins from March-2005 to Dec-2016 starting with initial arrear outstanding of Rs. 16,936/- on March-2005. But the consumer billing statement is completely silent regarding the disputed period i.e, Oct-1999 to onwards. Further the Complainant does not file any documents regarding non-supply of power during the disputed period except a letter addressed the S.D.O.-cum-Manager, Marshaghai on dt.30/3/15 narrating the erronious billing for the period of super cyclone and flood and make a request to revise the energy bill.

                               It is also evident from the consumer billing statement that from March-2005 to Dec-2016 the energy bills are prepared on actual consumption basis and in few months the monthly energy bill show HL(House Lock). In addition to that Ops in their written statement states that they are ready to revise the arrear outstandings, if the Complainant applies as per the provisions of Ops.

                       Considering the above facts we feel it proper and directed that Complainant will apply before Opno.3, J.E. Korua Section for revision of energy bill on receipt of the revision application, the Ops will revise energy bills starting from October-1999 to March-2005be served taking into account the non-availability period of power supply for super cyclone, flood etc, if not revised earlier a revised consumer billing statement from the year 1997 to March-2005 be served to the Complainant for better appreciation. It is further directed that from March-2005 to Dec-2016 Ops will not Charge energy dues for ‘House Lock’ ‘HL’ period except the MMFC(Minimum Monthly Fixed Charge). The Interim direction passed in I.A. case No. 16/15 is here by disposed as per our aforesaid observation.

                 The order is to be complied by the parties within one month of receipt of this Order, failing which action will be initiated against the defaulting parties as per the provisions of C.P.Act,1986. It is further directed that till compliance of the order Ops will not take any corecive action against the Complainant and Complainant has to pay the current monthly dues regularly.

                 Complaint is allowed in part without cost.

        Pronounced in the open Court, this 18th Day of March, 2017.

 
 
[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.