1. Brief fact of the case of the complainant is that since 3 decades he is the consumer of O.Ps having the electrical connection vide consumer no. 713202030141 installed at the outside of his house and used to pay the monthly consumption bill amount as per the consumption of electricity unit of 100 to 102 per month.  It is alleged that in the month of February, 2022 concerned persons of O.Ps came to his house and demanded arrear of Rs. 73,000/-, but did not supply the statement of account to the complainant, however, the complainant obtained the statement from online system and came to know that since February, 2008 the O.Ps have not the taken actual meter reading, rather showed on consumption average basis, whereas he is the permanent resident as per his above mentioned address. It is also alleged that since February, 2008 to February, 2013 and from April 2015 to November, 2015 no proper meter was taken, but the O.Ps have calculated on the average of 102 units and also from June, 2013 to February, 2015 the meter reading was taken on average of 86 unit, 43 unit and 144 unit.  It is also alleged that the O.Ps have calculated the monthly consumption bill from June 2013 to February, 2015 on two month basis with a calculation of 83 units to 200 units and from June 2015 to March 2016 the consumption unit was 144 on average basis, whereas on May, 2016 the said statement shows that meter reading unit is 2781 increasing at excessive speed.  It is also alleged that he has paid an amount of Rs. 70,000/- approx. towards consumption bill whereas the O.Ps is demanding arrear of Rs. 73,000/- approx. more.  Thus with other allegations, he filed this case with a prayer for issue of uptodate consumption bill on actual meter reading basis, to quash the entire illegal and excessive bill amount from February, 2008, not to disconnect the electricity connection, compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- and 10,000/- towards costs of litigation from the O.Ps.

2. O.Ps, being the same and one organization have appeared through their common A/R, who filed the counter versions admitting the power supply to the complainant but denied the allegations contending that the monthly units billed 102 units on load factor basis but not on actual basis.  It is also contended that the due to non payment, they have issued the disconnection notice during Sept. 2021.  It is further contended that the bill is revised and credited Rs. 5,625/- during April 2021 and the arrear was of Rs. 231/- only, whereas the complainant has paid only 11,250/-out of total dues of Rs. 86,708/- as on 01/2020 and as per one time settlement complainant paid Rs. 9,913/- and Rs. 5,625/- which was credited in the month of 4/2012 and with other contentions, showing their no liabilities, they prayed to dismiss the case.

3. Complainant has filed the copy of details of bill pattern obtained through online system and the O.P. has filed their own bill pattern.  Heard from the A/R for the respective parties.  Perused the record and materials available therein.

4. It is an admitted fact that the complainant is a consumer under the O.Ps having been availed the electricity connection bearing consumer no. 713202030141 which is installed at the outside of his house.  The allegations of complainant is that though he is used to pay the electricity bill as consumption units, whereas in the month of February, 2022 the concerned persons of O.Ps demanded arrear of Rs. 73,000/-, but did not supply the statement of account to the complainant, however, the complainant obtained the statement from online system and came to know that since February, 2008 the O.Ps have not the taken actual meter reading, rather showed the consumption on average basis.Whereas the O.Ps contended that monthly units billed 102 units on load factor basis but not on actual basis and due to non payment, they have issued the disconnection notice during Sept. 2021 and whereas the complainant paid only 11,250/- out of total outstanding Rs. 86,708/-, as such they have prayed for dismiss.

5. After careful observation of the case record and documents, now the only question arose

1. whether calculating the consumption unit on average basis continuously for long period is justified ?
2. whether the complainant has any liabilities / outstanding dues to the O.Ps ?
3. Whether the complainant is entitled any benefits as per prayer clause ?

6. Coming to the first point, we have gone through the documents filed by the parties. Complainant filed online downloaded copy of statement against the consumption of electricity of the alleged meter for the period from 2/2008 to 7/2021, which clearly shows that continuously for the period from 2/2008 to 2/2013 the bill unit was calculated on average basis of 102 unit, thereafter for 4/2013 the same is calculated on provisional basis and thereafter from 6/2013 to 2/2015 the calculation was made as per actual basis. It is also ascertained from the said documents that on many occasions, the bill unit was calculated on average basis, and on provisional basis and also on actual basis.It is a matter of surprise that why the O.Ps have calculated the units on the average basis / provisional on many times, whereas the complainant is the permanent resident of the said premises and the alleged meter was installed at the outside of his house, and there no obstacles or any type of problems to obtain the meter reading in times. Since the alleged meter is installed outside of the house, it is very much possible and convenient for the concerned persons of the O.Ps who are engaged for such duty, can take the meter reading properly on each month.

Further we have gone through the computer printout of copy of statement against the consumption of electricity of the alleged meter for the period from 4/2002 to 9/2021 filed by the O.P., which clearly shows that for the period from 2/2008 to 4/2012 the unit was calculated on the basis of load factor but not on the basis either on average or provisional or actual.  From 4/2012 to 02/2013 the unit was calculated on average basis.  And on 04/2013 the unit was calculated on provisional basis.  Reiterating the discussions of forgoing para, we would like to say that t is also a matter of surprise that why the O.Ps have calculated the units on the average basis / provisional on many times, whereas the complainant is the permanent resident of the said premises wherein the alleged meter was installed at the outside of his house, and there no obstacles or any type of problems to obtain the meter reading in times.  Since the alleged meter is installed outside of the house, it is very much possible for the concerned persons of the O.Ps who are engaged for such duty, can take the meter reading properly on each month.  Further no evidence is filed by the O.P. for such type of calculation.

Further it is ascertained as per the document filed by the O.Ps that as on 04/2016 the calculation of unit was 144 on average basis but on 05/2016 it was suddenly increased to 3501 units.  Regarding such excessive increase, the O.Ps have not filed any evidence to prove the procedure that how they have ascertained for such excessive increase of units.  No affidavit / documents also filed to that effect.  Hence we think, the procedure followed by the O.Ps. is not in accordance with the law.

From the above observation, we think, since the alleged meter was installed outside of the premises of the house of complainant, it is very much possible and convenient to take the meter reading properly intime, as the complainant is a permanent resident over the said premises residing thereof permanently.  Hence, in our view, the calculation of unit on the average basis, instead of actual basis, is not justified and answered accordingly.

7. Coming to the second point, on careful observation of the documents filed by the parties, we think that as on date of filing of the present case, the Tata Power has already taken over the charge of erstwhile SouthCo and the slab system is followed.  Further, since no proper procedure followed by the O.Ps., the consumption of unit for the period from 2/2008 to  should be taken on load factor basis, as the load factor is the actual unit which is reflected in the meter.  Hence considering the same, the load factor of 102 unit should be considered as the actual calculation of unit from 2/2008 to till the 3/2013.
   
   Further it is ascertained from the para no. 5 of counter filed by the O.P. that the complainant is having arrear of Rs,. 231/- whereas the document filed by the O.P. reflects something different.Hence we think, the O.P. has prepared their statement properly or else the counter has prepared properly, which itself is a contradictory one.However, complainant submitted that the O.P. demanded Rs. 73,000/- whereas he has paid Rs. 70,000/- already.Hence in our view, complainant is having dues of Rs. 3,000/- only to the O.P. as on the date of filing of the case. Accordingly the same is answered.
    
8. Coming to the third point, as per our observation, both parties have liabilities to each other.  Complainant is having outstanding dues of Rs. 3000/- to the O.P. whereas the O.P. has cause mental agony and financial loss as well as physical harassment due to issue of such type of bill against the alleged meter.  Hence this order.  

                                                                                                                    ORDER

        The complaint petition is allowed in part. The complainant is herewith directed to pay the outstanding dues of Rs. 3000/- to the O.P. and also to pay the actual consumption bill raised by them from 4/2022 onwards.  Simultaneously the O.P. is herewith directed to pay Rs. 20,000/- towards compensation and costs to the complainant.  All the directions should be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which both parties liable to pay the concerned awarded amount with interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of this order.

        Pronounced the order in the open Court on this the 24^th day of August, 2022.  Issue free copy to the parties concerned.