STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION

BIHAR, PATNA

Appeal No. 26 of 2023

1.  South Bihar Power Distribution Co. Ltd. (erstwhile Bihar State Electricity Board), Vidyut Bhawan, Nehru Path, Patna

2.  Chief Engineer, Magadh Area, Bihar State Electricity Board, Gaya

3.  The Electrical Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division (Urban), Gaya

4. Junior Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Section, Gandhi Maidan, Gaya

5. Section Clerk, Gaya (Urban) Electric Supply Division, Gandhi Maidan, Gaya

                    Appellant no. 1 to 5 are represented through Assistant Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply sub Division no. 1, Power House, Gaya

                                                                                                                                                                           … Appellants

Versus

Md. Gyasuddin Khan, aged about .. years, Son of Late W.H. Khan, resident of Mohalla- White House Compound, Road No. 3, PS- Rampur, District- Gaya

                                                                                                                                                       …. Complainant/Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant: Adv. Prakash Kumar & Adv. Anil Kumar

Counsel for the Respondent: None

Before,

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar, President

Md. Shamim Akhtar, Member

Dated 05.09.2023

As per Sanjay Kumar, President.

O r d e r

1. Present appeal has been filed by the appellant/opposite party for setting aside the order dated 17.09.2018 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Commission, Gaya in Consumer Complainant Case no. 64 of 2008 whereby and whereunder the Ld. District Consumer Commission has allowed the complaint case and directed appellants to revise the energy bill issued by the appellants for the month of April, 2007 and onwards on the basis of 6 Kilo Watt and has further directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for physical and mental harassment and Rs. 5,000/- as cost of litigation.
2. The judgment and order passed by the District Consumer Commission is dated 17.09.2018 and appeal has been filed on 08.02.2020 i.e about 5 years from the date of judgment and order passed by the District Consumer Commission.
3. An application has been filed for condonation of delay in filing the appeal explaining reasons for delay.
4. No sufficient cause and reasons have been assigned to condone the inordinate delay of nearly five years in filing appeal. The contention of the appellant that they were not aware of the passing of the judgment and order passed by District Consumer Commission is neither acceptable nor bonafide as appellants had appeared in the complaint case and had filed their written statement and contested the complaint case an order was passed in presence of their lawyer.
5. In said view of the matter this Commission is not inclined to condone the inordinate and unexplained delay of about 5 years in filing the appeal as such the application for condoning the delay in filing appeal is dismissed.
6. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

         (Md. Shamim Akhtar)                                                                                            (Sanjay Kumar,J)

                 Member                                                                                                                President

Md. Fariduzzama