SRI BIJAYA KUMAR DAS,PRESIDENT:-
Unfair trade practice and deficiency in service in respect of providing inflated and arbitrary monthly energy bills are the allegations arrayed against the Opp.Parties.
2. Complaint, in nutshell reveals that complainant’s deceased father namely Nityananda Das was a consumer under the Ops bearing old consumer No.D1 3F-22 which converted into new consumer A/C No.01051207. It is revealed that complainant is a very small family and he was paying monthly energy bills as per the meter reading and the contract demand is 2.5 KW. The complaint petition also reveals that on dtd.24.09.2014 the employees of the Ops verified the house of the complainant and found no illegal consumption, but submitted a false report and at present Ops without taking the consumption of monthly energy charges, as per meter reading preparing the energy bills on ‘average’ basis. Further the Ops are threatening to disconnect the power supply to the complainant’s premises. Complainant describes the action of the Ops as illegal and unfair trade practice which gives mental agony to the complainant and his family members prays before this Forum that a direction may be given to Ops to rectify the bill as per meter reading and further prays for award of Rs.30,000/- as compensation and cost of litigation. The cause of action of the instant case arose within local limits of this Forum and on dtd.24.09.2014 when the official of Ops verified the premises and lastly on dtd. 10.12.2014 when the Ops refused to rectify the bills.
3. Notice was sent through Regd. Post with A.D. to the Ops. Notice against OP No.1 Project Manager, Enzen Global Solution Pvt. Ltd. returned with the postal remarks ‘wrong address’, complainant did not take any lawful steps for service of notice to OP No.1 in spite the order of the Forum. Accordingly, Project Manager,OP No.1 deleted from the proceeding vide Order No.28 dtd. 11.05.16 of this Forum. Notice was sent to OP No.2 Asst.Manager,Commerce, Enzen Global Solution Pvt. Ltd.,Kendrapara by Regd. Post with A.D. Notice is sufficient against OP No.2. But OP No.2 did not prefer to appear into the dispute as it is a case of 2014 in spite of opportunities when OP N o.2 did not appear was set ex-parte by this Forum on dtd.25.05.2016.
4. Heard the ex-parte submissions advanced by Ld. Counsel for the complainant,perused the documents i.e. attested Xerox copies of monthly energy bills which reflected that Consumer A/C No.01051207 stands recorded in the name of Sri Nityananda Das, the father of the complainant, who died since long as ‘domestic’ category of consumer with contract demand of 2.5 K.W.
Complaint arises after service of monthly energy bills for the period Nov.2014. It is the case of the complainant that till September,2014 he was receiving the monthly energy bills as per the meter reading. But on visit/ inspection on dtd.24.09.2014 by the officials of Ops to his premises and found no illegality on consumption, but the Ops submitted a false report and demands more money reflected in the monthly energy bills. In this regards neither the complainant produced the alleged report nor described the details of the verification conducted by Ops on dtd. 24.09.14. Further, the Ops remained absent in the proceeding, the actual facts of dispute does not see the light of the day. On own admission of the complainant, there was a verification to the complainant’s premises by officials of the Ops on dtd.24.09.14 and a report was prepared, which according to complainant is a false report. But no such report was filed before this Forum as an evidence for better appreciation of the facts and for effective adjudication. Though the version of the complainant is no way countered by the Ops. In the circumstances, Section-13(2)(b)(ii) of the C.P.Act,1986 permits the Consumer Forum to decide a complaint on the basis of evidence brought before the Forum by the complainant where the Ops omits or fails to take any action to represent his case within the time given by the Forum. Thus, the intention of legislators are very clear in this regard,Forum can grant relief in favour of the complainant, basing on the evidences presented/produced by the complainant though the dispute is uncontroverted. In addition to that after the verification dtd. 24.09.14 the subsequent monthly energy bills shows abruptly high and the bills are prepared on average consumption basis. It appears to us that there was some material facts related to the verification dtd.24.09.14 which is suppressed and does not produced before this Forum for proper and effective adjudication. Accordingly, basing on the complaint and in absence of Ops, if this Forum accepts the prayer and any direction in this regard will be miscarriage of justice. We rely on a decision of the Hon’ble National Commission reported in 2014(4) CPR 134(NC) in case of UHBVNL –vrs- Sashi Chander’(Para-5). Further Regulation 91 of O.E.R.C.Code-2004 allows the complainant to raise the dispute related to bills before the designated officer/agency for redressal of his grievance.
Having observations reflected above an opportunity is given to the complainant to raise his grievance before appropriate designated authority within one month of receipt of this order. Time limit of filing and disposal of the present complaint will not be a bar to file/accept the complaint before the designated authority. In respect to our earlier order dtd.17.12.14 where an interim direction was given is hereby vacated, if any amount is deposited by the complainant for compliance of the order, same to be adjusted in the future monthly energy bills of complainant bearing Consumer No.01051207. Ops are hereby restrained not to take any corecive action against the said consumer account number till the complainant apply before the designated authority for redressal of his grievance.
Accordingly, the complaint is disposed of on ex-parte.
No order as to cost.
Pronounced in the open Court, this the 6th day of June,2016.
