DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI

                                                                                C.C.NO.13 OF 2017

Present: Sri Rabindranath Mishra            - President.

                 Miss Sudhiralaxmi Pattanaik   -  Member .

                  Sri Purna Chandra Tripathy       - Member .

Sri Trinath Sahu, aged- 39 years

S/O: Hrudayananda Sahu At: Penjisahi, Phulbani,

PO/PS: Phulbani Dist: Kandhmal                                                   ……………………….. Complainant.

                                Versus.

Executive Engineer, (electrical)

 Southco Utility, Phulbani Electrical Division, Phulbani

Po/PS:Phulbani Dist : Kandhamal

2. S.D.O, (Electrical) Southco. Utility

Phulbani Electrical Division,Phulbani

PO/Ps: Phulbani Dist: Kandhamal

3. Junior Engineer (electrical) Southco Utility

 Phulbani Electrical Division, Phulbani

PO/PS: Phulbanbi Dist: Kandhamal.                                          …………………………….. OPP. Parties.

For the Complainant: Sri Devi Prasad Kar, Advocate and his Associates.

For the OPP. Parties: Sri H.Ch. Maharana, Advocate,Phulbani and his Associates.

Date of Order: 30-01-2018

O R D E R

                                                The case of the Complainant in brief is that his father Hurdananda Sahu was a Consumer under the O.Ps having Consumer No. 1004/D-388 and he was depositing the electric bill regularly. His house was demolished in the year 1996-97 and the power supply was also disconnected from his premises but energy charge was claimed by the O.Ps regularly. Subsequently he shifted to another house which situated at Penjisahi, Phulbani and died on 30-04-2007. In the month of January 2015, the Complainant want to start construction work of the house of his father situated at F.C.I Square, phulbani and want to obtain a new connection of power supply. But the Opposite Parties claimed an arrear amount of Rs 88531.93 outstanding against the old Consumer number. The official record of the O.Ps does not reveal that the power supply was disconnected from the said premises.

                                                                                                              -2-

On 16-01-2015 the Complainant deposited Rs. 5,150/-and availed power supply and installed a new meter .As the energy charge bills prior to installation of the new meter was not revised he reported the matter to the O.Ps. On 28-05-2016 he had filed a grievance application before the Grievance Redressal Forum, Berhampur to rectify the defective billing. The forum has directed to the O.Ps to establish the date of disconnection of the power supply by verifying official record and to serve the revised bill within 15 days but the O.Ps did not take any steps for which the Complainant is suffering as they threatened  to disconnect the power supply from his premises. So, this complaint is filed by him for a direction to the O.Ps not to disconnect the power supply till the supply of rectified energy bill to him and to award Rs. 10,000/- toward cost of litigation.

                                                The case of the O.Ps as per their joint version is that it is a fact that the power supply of Sri Hrudananda Sahu was under disconnection from Nov 1998 to Jan 2008. After reconnection the billing was made on actual basis from Feb 2008 to May 2011 and subsequently on average basis from June 2011 to April 2014. Again the power supply was disconnected from May 2014 to December 2014. As per application and after depositing the reconnection fees the power supply was reconnected by installing a new meter to the said premises against the said consumer No. 2921011730020 on 16-01-2015.As per the final order of the Honorable President G.R.F Berhampur the O.P revised the bill from 2/99 to 01/2008,09/2008 to 12/2008, 04/2009 to 11/2009, 06/2011 to 12/2014 and 21.01.2015 to 06/2015 .As the dispute is already adjudicated before the Honorable President G.R.F , Berhampur , this Honorable Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint . The allegation of deficiency in service and negligence are not true for which the Complaint be dismissed with cost.

                                                We have heard the Complainant and the learned counsel appearing for both the parties. We have gone through the complaint petition, the joint version of the O.ps, the written argument filed by the Complainant and the documents filed by both the parties in support of their case. On verification of the record it is seen that the grievance petition filed by the complainant before Grievance Redressal Forum, Berhampur was disposed of on 25-06-2016 before filing of this complaint. So, it can not be said that this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint of the Complainant. Accordingly, the plea taken by the learned counsel of the O.Ps is not accepted by us.

                                                The main point of consideration in this case is that whether the electricity charges can be recovered from the Complainant after 19 years. Neither the Complainant nor the Opp. Parties have filed any bill to prove the claim of the electricity charge. It is submitted by the learned counsel that as per final order of the Hon’ble President GRF, Berhampur the O.P revised the bill from 02/1999 to 01/2008, 09/2008 to 12/2008, 04/2009 to 11/2009, 06/2011 to 12/2004 and 21-01-2015 to 06/2015. It is admitted fact that on 16-01-2015 a new meter was installed in the premises of the Complainant after the deposit of reconnection charge and Rs. 5000/- towards the current charge. But the Opp. Party never supplied any bill to the Complainant. So for the first time the Opp. Party claimed the electricity charge from the Complainant by assessing and revising the Bill up to June 2015 as per their assessment dated 04-08-2016.

                                                As per section 56 (2) of Electricity Act 2003 and Regulation 94 (2) of OERC. Distribution (conditions of Supply) code 2004 electricity charges can not be recovered for more than 2 years from the due date unless such sum has been shown continuously as recoverable as arrears of charges for electricity supplied and the licensee shall not cut-off the supply of the electricity.

                                                                                                           -3-

                                                In this case bill was not issued to the Complainant regularly. It is obligatory on the part of the Opp. Parties to visit the Consumer regularly and check the meter. It is also obligatory to take the meter reading for every month. But there is no evidence that the meter reading was taken by the O.P and the bills were issued regularly to the Complainant. This attitude amounts to negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the Opp. Parties. Hence the complaint filed by the Complainant is allowed in part in the above circumstances.

                                                In the present case the assessment of the Bill was prepared by the Opp. Parties on 04-08-2016. Hence they can recover the bill for the period 03-08-2014 to 03-08-2016 only. So the Opp. Parties are directed to prepare the bill for the period 03-08-2014 to 03-08-2016 taking in to account of the disconnection of electricity supply and by adjusting the payment if any by the Complainant. The said bill be issued within 30 days from the date of this order and the Complainant shall deposit the said bill in reasonable installments.

                                                The C.C is disposed-of. Supply free copy of this order to both the parties at an early date.

      MEMBER                                                                             MEMBER                                                             PRESIDENT