(Passed on 04.02.2013)
Per Mr S M Shembole, Hon’ble Presiding Member
This appeal is an exception to the judgement & order dtd.16.04.2010 passed by District Consumer Forum, Amravati, dismissing the Consumer Complaint No.CC/09/225.
(For the sake of brevity the appellant is hereinafter referred as “the complainant” and the respondent as “the o.p.”.)
Brief facts giving to this appeal are that:-
1. The complainant is the consumer of the respondent. The complainant is running Ice Factory at Kandali, Tah. Achalpur, Dist. Amravati. Initially he had obtained electric connection of 15 HP and thereafter on 21.05.2007 he obtained electric connection for additional 15 HP i.e. for total 30 HP and again it was increased up to 40 HP. Till the month of June 2007 electric bill was issued @ `3/- per unit. According to the complainant he paid electric bill amount regularly, however, o.p. issued supplementary bill dtd. 30.09.2009, claiming additional electricity charges `1,09,145/-, alleging that the earlier bill was wrongly issued @ `3/- per unit instead of `4.50 per unit. It is also submitted that the complainant is entitled for getting exemption for payment of electricity duty as per its circular / letter dtd.08.10.2008 which was issued to the electrical inspector by General Manager, District Industries Centre, Amravati. The complainant disputed the additional bill; giving notice to the o.p. but the o.p. did not accept his grievance. Therefore, he made Consumer Complaint, alleging deficiency in service on the part of o.p. He has claimed declaration that disputed bill of `1,09.145/- is an illegal and further claimed compensation at `50,000/- for causing mental & physical harassment and `10,000/- more towards cost of proceedings.
2. O.p. resisted the complaint by its Written Version. It did not dispute that initially bill was issued @ `3/- per unit and further the disputed bill was issued as initial bill was wrongly issued, etc. The o.p also denied the complainant’s claim for exemption for payment of electricity duty and submitted to dismiss the complaint.
3. On hearing both the sides and considering the documents on record the Forum dismissed the complaint, holding that the complainant is not entitled to get any exemption as per the circular / letter dtd.08.10.2008 and further there was no deficiency on the part of o.p in issuing supplementary disputed bill.
4. Feeling aggrieved by that judgement & order the complainant has preferred this appeal.
5. We heard Ld. counsel for both the sides and perused the copy of impugned judgement & order, copies of complaint, Written Version, circular / letter dtd.08.10.2008 issued by the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Amravati, etc and considering the facts of the case, we have decided to dispose of this appeal at the time of hearing before admission.
6. Mr S Kasturiwal, Ld. counsel appeared for the complainant submitted that as per the letter dtd.08.10.2008 the complainant is entitled to get exemption from the payment electricity duty, etc. He has also pointed out the circular issued by the o.p. and letter dtd.08.10.2008 issued by District Industries Centre, Amravati about exemption of electricity duty but he could not explain as to how this letter is applicable to complainant. However, he fairly conceded that the exemption is w.e.f. 01.10.2008, whereas the disputed bill is for the period from June 2007 to Aug. 2008. Therefore, the Forum has rightly rejected the claim of the complainant.
7. Now coming to the supplementary bill which is disputed by Mr S Kasturiwala, Ld. counsel for the complainant that once the o.p issued the bill @ @ `3/- per unit and the complainant has already paid it, the o.p. again issued revised bill alleging that it was wrongly issued, etc. To which, Mr C A Babrekar submitted that the o.p. has rightly issued the supplementary bill on the basis of tariff, which was application during the relevant period. He has also pointed out the affidavit of Mr Satish Chopadekar a clerk, working with the o.p and submitted that he has rightly disclosed the then tariff applicable to small scale industries / units. On perusal of the copy of affidavit it is obvious that during the relevant period, as per tariff, the o.p was entitled to recover the electricity charges @ `4.50/- per unit. However, inadvertently, initial bill was issued considering tariff @ `3/- per unit. Therefore, it can be accepted that o.p. is entitled to recover additional charges by issuing supplementary bill.
8. Mr S Kasturiwala for the complainant also could not point out the then tariff published by the o.p. Therefore, the Forum has rightly accepted the affidavit of Mr Satish Chopadekar, a Clerk of o.p. and rightly held that the o.p. is entitled to recover additional electricity charges as per the disputed supplementary bill. We find no error or any illegality in the impugned judgement & order. Hence, no interference is warranted.
9. In the result, the appeal is being devoid of any merit, is liable to be summarily dismissed.
Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
i. Appeal is summarily dismissed.
ii. No order as to cost.
iii. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties.
