DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM:BHADRAK
Dated the 18th day of November, 2016
C.D.Case No.40 of 2011
Sri Abhaya Kumar Parida
S/o: Late Pitamber Parida
Vill: Baliajitapada, Po: Balabhadrapur
Ps: Bhadrak (R), Dist: Bhadrak
……………………. Complainant
(Versus)
Executive Engineer Electrical NESCO
Po/Ps/Dist: Bhadrak
S.D.O Electrical South Division
At: Bonth Chhak
Po/Ps/Dist: Bhadrak
Junior Engineer (Electrical), Asurali Circle
At/Po: Asurali, Ps: Dhusuri
Dist: Bhadrak
………………………..Opp. Parties
For the Complainant: D. N Panda, Advocate
For OP No. 2: Appeared in person
Date of hearing : 05.10.2016
Date of order : 18.11.2016
AFSARA BEGUM, MEMBER
The dispute arises out of the complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the O.P.
The brief facts mentioned in the complaint are that the complainants father Pitamber Parida was a consumer under O.P. He was supplied electric connection on 21.01.1997, installed a meter bearing No. 10956982. His consumer number is B23359. After his death the complainant Abhaya Kumar Parida is continuing as a consumer under O.P. It is also alleged that he is a driver by profession, he resides in Kolkata most of the time. The complainant’s wife used to pay electric bills to the O.P. In the year 2004, the complainant came to know about false reading and erroneous meter No. 10583640. The complaint made an application to the S.D.O, Bhadrak for correction of meter No. 10583640 & meter reading. But the S.D.O directed the J.E to install a new meter. The J.E visited the spot & verified the meter & mentioned original meter No. 10956982 & reported that meter stat is OK. The J.E assured that defective bills will not be issued again. But no steps were taken to rectify the false reading & erroneous billing.
On 15.12.2015 the inspecting officer visited the spot & reported that electric consumption more then two K.W & enhanced electric load 1 K.W to 2 K.W.
He also reported that status of meter is defective a new meter should be installed. On 21.11.2006 a new meter bearing No. 1035038 was installed.
In the year 2007 a bill was issued with previous meter No. 10586340 and arrear was of Rs 48,433/-. The complainant made another application to the O.Ps vide letter No. 915 on 24.11.2009 for enquiry but the O.Ps did not respond the same. But on the other hand issued another bill towards the dues of November 2009 to December 2010 showing arrear & current charges in total for Rs 51,228/- with erroneous meter No. 10583640. The complainant time & again requested the O.Ps to correct the false bills but the O.Ps threatened him to disconnect electricity supply from his premises.
The O.Ps resisted complaints, denied averments made in the complaint. They submitted that averments made in complaint para- 4 & Para- 5 are partly correct & partly wrong. Further he submitted that the total outstanding dues against the complaint up to 2001 was of Rs 8335.06 paisa. They also submitted that there are two energy meters bearing No. 956982 and 1035038 were installed in the premises of the complainant to measure his consumption but the complainant intentionally made those meters defective. So that actual consumption could not be as certained.
Further the O.Ps submitted that there was initial power supply in the premises of the complainant, which was given on 02.01.1997 through meter No. 10583640 in the name of Pitamber Parida. But the complaint has never applied before competent authorities as per regulation 11 of O.E.R.C distribution code 2004.
The complainant in order to prove his case relied upon some documents which have been filed as Annexure- 1 to Annexure- 6.
On consideration of totality of the facts & circumstances of this case there are two questions arises.
Whether meter No. 10583640 is false or not?
Whether meter No. 956982 and 1035038 are defective or not.
All the electricity bills filed by the complainant reveals meter No. 10583640 but meter test report, spot verification reports reveals meter No. 956982 & meter No. 1055038. A meter bearing No. 956982 was installed in the initial stage & a meter bearing No. 1035038 was installed on 21.11.2006. The O.P also admitted in their written version that there are two meters installed in the premises of the complainant. So it is clear to say that meter No. 10583640 which is mentioned on all the electricity bills is false & erroneous.
Secondly there are three reports present in the record made by the authorized officer of the O.Ps which shows meter was sealed from outside. So it cannot be presumed that a person will made the meter defective.
In the light of aforesaid discussion. We do not find any such averments in the written version and any documents in support this submission that meter No. 10583640 is complainants previous meter number & electricity bills from 2004 to 2015 issued by the O.Ps & correct. The O.Ps have submitted in there written version that on 21.11.2006 a meter bearing No. 1035038 was installed in the premises of the complainant but electricity bills from 2006 to 2015 reveals previous erroneous meter number was remain unchanged.
On careful perusal of evidence we find that the O.Ps have not led any evidence to show that argument made by the O.Ps are wrong. Hence complaint allowed & the O.P No. 2 is liable to pay compensation for mental agony & harassment, other compensation with litigation cost.
ORDER
The complaint be & same is allowed on contest against the O.Ps. The OP No. 2 is directed not to disconnect the electricity supply from the premises of the complainant, to correct the erroneous meter No. 10583640, to correct the bills from 2004 to till date & if there in any excessive amount is paid by the complainant it would be adjusted to subsequent bills and the OP No. 2 is directed to pay compensation of Rs 5000/- towards mental agony & harassment & Rs 1000/- for litigation cost within a period of 30 days of receipt of order failing which interest at the bank rate i.e 9% P.A shall be charged.
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on 18th day of November, 2016 under my hand & seal of the Forum.
