DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI

                                                                                        C.C.NO.10 OF 2022

                                                                                                                             Date of Filing  : 18.05.2021

                                                                 Date of Order : 25.10.2022

Sri.  Madan Nayak

S/O: Late Sushi Nayak

AT/PO-Kurtamgada

PS- Tumudibandh, Dist- Kandhamal.          …………………….. Complainant.

                        Versus.

1. Executive Engineer,TPSODL,

TP Southern Odisha Distribution Limited,

Phulbani electrical Division, Phulbani

AT/PO/PS- Phulbani town

Dist.- Kandhamal

2.  The Sub- Divisional Officer TPSODL,

Balliguda Electrical Sub-Division,

AT/PO/PS- Balliguda

DIST-Kandhamal    

3. The Junior Engineer, TPSODL,

Tumudibandh Section(Electrical) 

AT/PO/PS- Tumudibandh

DIST- Kandhamal                                       ………………………….. OPP. Parties.

Present: Sri Purna Chandra Mishra    - President.

                           Sri Sudhakar Senapothi     - Member.

For the Complainant: Mr.Rabindranath Mishra,Advocate & associates

For O.P.1, 2 & 3 – Mr. Harischandra Maharana,Advocate

JUDGEMENT

Mr. Purna Chandra Mishra, President

 The complainant Mr.Madan Nayak has filed this case u/s 35 of the C.P Act 2019 alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the O.Ps for providing him with an erratic bill and not rectifying it in spite of repeated approaches and praying therein for direction to the O.Ps to provide the correct bill and pay cost and compensation of Rs.40, 000/-.

1. Brief fact leading to the case is that the petitioner is a consumer of the O.Ps bearing consumer No.292001020130.He was paying energy charges regularly as per actual meter reading. But in the month of August 2021, he was served with a bill for Rs.171/- showing his meter to be defective. He requested O.P No.3 to rectify an erratic bill and install a new meter but he remained callous to the complaint made by the complainant and a bill of Rs.62,682/- was served on him for the period from 15.08.2021 to 07.11.2021. and subsequently with another bill for Rs.67,602/- for the period from 08.11.2021 to 15.12.2021. On receiving the erratic bills the complainant submitted an application to O.P No.1 through O.P No. 3 for correction of the bill and also deposited a sum of Rs.10, 000/- on 21.02.2022 on the basis of electric bill served on him. On 09.03.2022 a new meter was installed replacing the old meter and he deposited a sum of Rs.15,000/- on 28.03.2022

as per the advice of the O.Ps. But on 09.05.2022 he was served with an bill for Rs.1,01,176/- for the period from 06.04.2022 to 28.04.2022 along with a noticeto deposited a sum of Rs.72,419/- within 15 days with a warning to disconnect forpower supply unless the amountis paid in full. Being harassed by such conduct of the O.P the petitioner filed this case before this Commission for the reliefs as discussed in the preceding paragraph.

2. Notice was issued and duly served on the O.Ps and they appeared through their Advocate but preferred not to file any written version or document in support of their defence.
3. The complainant in support of this case has filed copy of the energy bill for the month of August 2021, March 2022, May 2022 and disconnection notice dated 09.05.2022.
4. The only question relating this case is whether the complainant is entitled for revision of his energy bill from 15.08.2021 onwards. It is settle principle of law that where the O.Ps appeared but did not raise any objection to the allegations raised against them it is deemed to have been admitted by them. In the case it is seen from the energy bills filed by the complainant that the meter has been declared defective in the month August 2021. There is nothing on record to show that the O.Ps have followed due procedure of law as prescribed under Electricity Act 2003 and rules and regulations made there  under for providing energy bill. It is seen from the energy bill from the month of March 2022 that meter reading has not been taken by the O.Ps. But in the bill for the month of May 2022 shows that the bill has been raised on the basis of actual meter reading. So the pleading of the complainant that a new meter was installed on 09.03.2022 is correct. It is clear from the bills filed by the complainant that the meter has become defective in the month of August 2021 and a new meter has been installed on 09.03.2022. After installation of the new meter the O.Ps have not rectified his energy bills in accordance with the manner prescribed under law and have threatened to disconnect power supply which amount to deficiency in service and hence the order.

ORDER

The complaint petition is allowed against the O.Ps on contest. The O.Ps are made liable for causing deficiency in service and harassment to the petitioner. The O.Ps are directed to rectify the energy bill of the petitioner for the period from August 2021 onwards in accordance with the provisions of OERC (Conditions of Supply and Distribution)Code 2019 and shall not disconnect power supply of the complainant bearing consumer No.292001020130. The O.Ps are further burdened with compensation of Rs.20,000/- and Rs.5000/- towards cost of litigation. The order is to be complied with in period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

                        I Agree

                      MEMBER                                                           PRESIDENT

Pronounced in the open Commissioner today on this 25th day of October 2022 in the presence of the parties.

                       MEMBER                                                                      PRESIDENT