DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: BHADRAK
Dated the 31st day of August, 2018
Present 1. Shri Raghunath Kar, President
2. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Member
3. Afsara Begum, Member
C.D Case No. 68 of 2016
Duryodhan Mallik
S/o Late Raghunath Mallik
Vill: Mirha Sanpur
Po: Jalamandua
Ps: Dhamnagar
Dist: Bhadrak
……………………. Complainant
(Versus)
1. Junior Engineer Electrical, Bhandaripokharo- I Section
At: Dhamnagar Chaka
Po: Piripur
Ps: Dhamnagar
Dist: Bhadrak
2. S.D.O Electrical Sub-Division, Dhamnagar
At/Po/Ps: Dhamnagar
Dist: Bhadrak
3. Executive Engineer, Electrical Division
BSED, Bhadrak
At: Aradi Chhaka
Po/Ps/Dist: Bhadrak
…………………………..Opp. Parties
Council for Complainant: Sri Niranjan Sahoo
Council for O.Ps: Sri D. Nayak
Date of hearing: 03.07.2017
Date of order: 31.08.2018
AFSARA BEGUM, MEMBER
1. This dispute arises out of a complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service against the O.Ps.
2. The brief facts as set out in the complaint that the father of the complainant was a regular paying consumer under OP. He was supplied electricity connection in his house by a meter bearing No. DY444 having load factor of 1 KW.
3. After availing power supply the father of the complainant was paying electricity bill regularly. But after his father death the complaint is his legal heir. So the complainant is paying electric bill regular as per consumption after his father death. The complaint enhanced load factor 1 KW to 2 KW subsequently. But the O.Ps with ill intention and without knowledge of the complaint enhanced another load factor of 2 KW subsequently, which shocked to the complainant.
4. On 13.11.2015 the OP No. 1 demanded the complainant to pay Rs 49,394/- as arrear amount. The complainant could not pay the huge amount. So the OP No. 1 and his associates disconnected the power supply and took the meter. The complainant time and again went to the office of the O.Ps and met the OP No. 1 asked about reconnection. The OP No. 1 suggest the complainant to deposit of Rs 23,000/- as arrear. The complainant deposited the same amount. On 27.11.2015 the OP No. 1 delivered receipt mentioning Rs 23,000/- is received towards penalty. On 30.11.2015 the complaint went to office of the executive engineer with a written application and submitted before him. The executive engineer assured him to considered the matter. On 17.01.2016 the OP No. 1 reconnected the electric supply by installing a new meter under the instruction of executive engineer.
Hence the complainant filed the complaint against the O.Ps sought for the reliefs:-
1. The O.Ps be directed to revise the electric bills for the month of
2. The O.Ps be directed to pay Rs 10,000/- for mental agony.
3. The O.Ps be directed to pay cost of litigation fee Rs 10,000/- only to the complainant.
The complainant has submitted relevant documents to prove his case. The following documents are:-
1. Xerox copies of electricity bills.
2. Xerox copies of money receipts.
3. Xerox copies of application dt. 30.11.2015.
The O.Ps have appeared and vehemently denied all the averments made in the complaint.
The defense set up by the O.Ps as follows.
That the complaint filed by complainant is not maintainable.
That there is no cause of action on the part of the present complaint to file the case as against the present O.Ps.
That prayer has been made by the deponent being outside the scope, preview and jurisdiction of this Forum.
That, the alleged dispute cannot be deficiency of service within preview of CP Act.
That prior to filing this complaint the complainant has not filed any complaint regarding the erroneous billing and also the complainant has not filed any complaint before the designated authority as per regulation 91 of the OERC (Distribution and condition of supply) Code 2004.
That the complainant has suppressed material fact that on 13.11.2015 in presence of the complainant and their representative the premises of the complainant was inspected and the spot verification report on checking of installation was offered to the complainant but he refused to signed. So the aforesaid report was affixed in the front of s the premises. Therefore provisional proceeding was initiated U/s 126 for unauthorized use of electricity. When the complainant did not appeared before the assessing authority the final assessment order amount to Rs 26,282/- was passed on dt. 11.12.2015 and penal amount was added to the bill of consumer.
That the complainant paid Rs 23,000/- in the month of November, 2015 against arrear electricity bill amounting Rs 49,394/- up to October, 2015.
That a meter was installed in the month of December, 2015 but the complainant did not pay the aforesaid amount for which it was added in the electricity bill.
That as per official record billing was made from December, 2009 to November, 2013 on load factor basis. After installing a new meter in the month of December the bill was made as actual basis.
The O.Ps have submitted some documents:-
1. Spot verification report.
2. Provisional assessment of penalty.
3. Notice of show cause.
4. Provisional assessment order.
5. Final assessment order.
The aforesaid dispute has been heard by both the parties. After hearing of both the parties and going through the record and documents submitted by both the parties there are two question arises.
1. The first question arises to our consideration as to whether the O.Ps have lave committed any deficiency in service or not?
2. Secondly whether the case is maintainable or not?
As per first question the O.Ps have not committed deficiency in service because the complainant submitted in his complaint on 13.11.2015 the OP No. 1 and his associated told to the complaint to pay Rs 49,394/- towards electricity arrear. When the complainant requested the O.Ps he could not pay one time the O.Ps disconnected the power supply and taken the meter. On 27.11.2015 the complainant deposited Rs 23,000/- towards arrear and Rs 1,350/- towards other charges but the O.Ps did not issue any receipt of the said amount and on 29.11.2015 the O.Ps delivered receipt which shows Rs 23,000/- has been received towards penalty. The complainant informed this matter to the executive engineer. He assured the adjust the payment of Rs 23,000/- of arrear bills. Then the O.Ps connected the power supply by affixing a new meter. So the statement made by the complainant in his complaint shows that the O.Ps have not committed any deficiency in service. Because the O.Ps have performed their duty by connecting power supply. Secondly the complainant submitted in his complaint that according to version of the executive engineer he has not adjusted of Rs 23,000/- towards arrear the O.Ps submitted in his written version that sport verification was made for unauthorized power supply of 2 KW load factor, temper the energy meter but the complainant refused to sign the report. So report was affixed on front of the premises. Then the final assessment order was passed on 11.12.2015 amounting to Rs 26,282/-, when the complainant did not take any step.
The spot verification report submitted by the O.Ps reflects that the complainant availing power supply of 2 KW load factor and the complainant also admitted in his complaint that his father was supplied electric of 1 KW load factor and subsequently the O.Ps have enhanced to 1.5 KW then the 2 KW load factor. But the complainant has not submitted any scrap of paper that he has subsequently enhanced the load factor and the O.Ps have illegally enhanced to 2 KW load factor. So the complainant itself proves that the complainant illegally consuming 2 KW load factor.
As per second question the aforesaid case is not maintainable in the eyes of law because there is no cause of action arose. As per law cause of action means the cause or set of circumstances which leads up to suit or dispute. It may competently be defined as being the facts or which establish or gives rise to a right of action or the existence of which entitles a party to seek redress but in a Court of law there is no cause of action. The complainant categorically submitted in his complaint that cause of action arose on 17.05.2016 when the complainant come to know that payment of Rs 23,000/- made by him was not adjudicated in the current bill. But it is not set out from the complainant that the complainants inform the matter to the O.Ps and O.Ps denied to perform their duty or harassed the complainant etc. So how the cause of action arose, through the O.Ps have no knowledge about the fact. On the other hand the O.Ps reconnected the power supply.
The complainant categorically stated in his complainant that on 13.11.2015 the O.Ps demanded Rs 49,394/- towards arrear, when the complainant reluctant to pay the arrear amount, the O.Ps took away meter and disconnected the power supply. After payment of Rs 23,000/- as per instruction of OP No. 1, the O.Ps reconnect the power supply on 17.01.2016.
So it is clear that the O.Ps have perform their duty very honestly. They have not committed any deficiency in service. Because on the evaluation of facts and evidence as has come to our notice, we justifiably come to the conclusion that the O.Ps have perform their duty very honestly and co-operate the complainant.
The complaint filed by the complainant is immaterial, imperfect and inequitable by law. He is not entitled to get reliefs sought for by him. Hence it is ordered;
ORDER
The complaint be and the same is dismissed on contest against the O.Ps without cost. This Forum is suggests the O.Ps to be a little linen for settlement of arrear claim.
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 31st August, 2018 under my hand and seal of the Forum.
