STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION

BIHAR, PATNA

Appeal No. 03 of 2019

Assistant Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Sub Division, Chandauti, Gaya (Rural)

                                                                                                                                                                  .…  Appellant

Versus

1. Harendra Mohan Mishra, Son of Late Rishishwar Mishra

2. Jyoti Kumari, daughter of Harendra Mohan Mishra, both resident of Barka Aahar, Brahm Sthan Kujapi, Gaya at present C/o- Arjun Yadav, New Colony, Chhotki Delha, Road no. 2D (behind Shiv Dayalu Nath Mandir), Gaya

                                                                                                                                             ….   Respondents

Before,

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar, President

Mr. Ram Prawesh Das, Member

Counsel for the appellant: Adv. Shrekant Sharan Singh

Counsel for the respondent:

Dated 02.02.2023

As per Sanjay Kumar, President.

O r d e r

Present appeal has been filed on behalf of appellant for setting aside the order dated 24.07.2018 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Forum, Gaya in Complaint Case no. 54 of 2013 whereby and whereunder the Ld. District Consumer Forum, Gaya has allowed the complaint case directing the opposite party/appellant to pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for physical and mental harassment  and Rs. 5,000/- as cost of litigation to the complainant within 2 months, failing which interest @8% shall become payable.  

                   Complainants filed complaint case before District Forum claiming following reliefs:-

1. For amendment in name, father’s name and address in the Energy Bill sent by the opposite party.
2. For correction of electricity energy bill of month September, 2012 and October, 2012 for Rs. 3,675/- and Rs. 3,909/- respectively.
3. For issuing required pole and wire to the house of complainant.
4. For exemption of D P S.
5. Compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for loss suffered in profession and Rs. 40,000/- for physical and mental harassment.
6. Cost of litigation amounting to Rs. 10,000/- also claimed by complainant.

On notice opposite party appeared and filed his written statement stating therein that for correction of name of father and address wrongly printed in electricity bill, the opposite party (appellant) had asked the complainant to submit security money receipt as evident from letter no. 29 dated 18^th January 2016 and letter no. 41 dated 13^th January, 2016.

There is no discrepancy in the electricity bill of September 2012 and October 2012 as it has been issued on basis of meter reading alongwith other charges as per tarrif.

As far as making provision for 4 electric polls and 350 feet wire is concerned same is not feasible for providing for one house and as per safety measures covered wire has been provided for supply of electricity.

Both parties have adduced oral as well as documentary evidence.

The District Consumer Forum after appreciation and consideration of evidences and materials placed on record held that (1) during pendency of consumer case opposite party has corrected the name and address in the Electricity bill as such said grievance of the complainant stands redressed.

(ii) During of pendency of consumer case opposite party has corrected Bill for September, 2012 and October 2012 as such this grievance of the complainant also stands redressed.  

(iii) There is no need to make provision for electric poles as house of complainant is situated only 5 meters away from nearest pole.

(iv) Charging DPS as per tarrif is within the domain of South Bihar Power Distribution Company as such can not be interfered , however opposite party (appellant) shall act in accordance with rules on this subject.

The District Consumer Forum finally held that since the grievances of complainant was not attended by the opposite party (appellant) even after filing of complaint by the complainant and they had to approach Consumer Forum for redressal of their grievances as such there was deficiency in service on part of opposite party (appellant) and granted compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for physical and mental harassment and Rs. 5,000/- as cost of litigation.

          Appellant has filed this appeal to set aside the order granting compensation and cost of litigation since grievances of the complainant has been redressed by appellant and nothing remains thereafter.

          Having heard Ld. Counsel for the parties this court is not inclined to interfere in the order passed by District Consumer Forum, Gaya as opposite party (appellant) did not attend the grievances of complainant inspite of several  representation and  he was compelled to approach District Consumer Forum, Gaya for redressal of his grievances as such this Commission does not find any error or infirmity in the order passed by District Consumer Forum, Gaya granting Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for physical and mental harassment and Rs. 5,000/- as cost of litigation.

           There is no merit in this appeal and is accordingly, dismissed.

(Ram Prawesh Das)                                                                              (Sanjay Kumar,J)

       Member                                                                                                President

Md. Fariduzzama