Hazira submitted by the parties. This is a offshoot of the CC Case No.8 of 2020. The Complainant Smti. Swapna Duttta brought the complaint under Consumer Protection Act.1986 against the SDE, Silchar Electrical Sub Division-II for disservice in respect of raising electricity consumption Bill since installation of three phase Meter in her dwelling house vide installation No.5000359373, Consumer A/C No.51000269703 and Meter SL.No.19262288 on 12/07/2019.

Accordingly, the Complainant brought the detail facts in the complaint stating inter alia that since installation of three phase connection, first bill was raised on 16.8.2019 of Rs. 9986.22/- for unit consumption of 469 with estimated consumption unit of 777 for 10 days with effect from 02.07.2019 to 11.07.2019 because her single phase electricity line was burnt on 02/07/2019 and three phase line was installed on 12.07.2019.

The Complainant has no objection about the unit consumption for above 36 days of 469 units but raised objection vehemently that estimated bill for 777 units raised arbitrarily. However, she paid online the total bill amount of Rs.9986.22/-, vide Annexure-2A. Thereafter, as per her version the newly installed Meter did not display the daily unit consumption and as such the Complainant is unable to read the actual consumption to control and regulate daily consumption of electricity.

She further stated that the Meter remaining static for whole the month and at the last date of each the month by jumping display the unit consumption, which is very inconvenience for her and also as per her opinion the meter displaying false unit consumption.

As such she is not making payment of subsequently raising electricity Bills with outstanding amount of Rs.36,878.78/- plus outstanding surcharge of Rs.1363.13/-. Rather, requested the APDCL to look in the matter and test the meter with an independent and neutral agency but the APDCL not yet done the task rather disregarding the request of the Complainant, issued Notice to disconnect the electricity line, vide No.SESD-II/T-42/2019-2020/842, dated 15.02.2020 on the ground of non-payment of bill.

Hence, a separate petition submitted supporting an affidavit with prayer for ad interim prohibitory order to the APDCL to restrain it to disconnect the Electricity line till disposal of the case mentioned above.

The APDCL in reply to the Show-cause Notice, stated inter-alia that estimated units determined as 777 for 10 days because the Complainant installed three phase line with 10 Kw connected load. Moreover, in the reply the APDCL stated that newly installed meter was tested and found no major defects.

However, after hearing both sides’ counsels and perusal of the material on record including complaint, petition for ad-interim injunction and show cause reply, I am of opinion that issue regarding alleged defective meter and raising electricity bills will be decided in the main CC Case No.8 of 2020.

But at this stage when an undisputed Bill 469 units for 36 days is available in the case record and at the same the O.P. is unable to established convincingly the average consumption of 777 units for 10 days mentioned hereinabove, I am of opinion that it would be justiciable to ask the APDCL to refrain from disconnecting the electricity line from the house of the complainant until further order subject to payment of unpaid monthly electricity bill at the rate of 469 units per month with effect from 02/07/2019.

Thus, the APDCL is ask to raise a fresh bill after adjustment of amount of Rs.9986.22/- which has already been paid, vide Bill No.M042A02S-1001156345, dated 16/08/2019 accordingly keeping aside the earlier bills for final adjudication and on receiving the fresh bill the complainant is to make payment of the bill amount within 3(three) days from the date of receiving the bill. If the Complainant fails to make payment of the newly raised bill at the rate 469 units per month within the stipulated period for any reason except the ground her control, the APDCL is at liberty to disconnect the electricity line.

The above order is passed as interim measure because from the record and after hearing both sides’ counsels I have found a prima facie case for relief as prayed for. Not only that bit also it is opined that balance of inconvenience and irreparable loss is lying with the complainant if the electricity line disconnected.

With the above, this Misc case is disposed of on contest without any cost. Supply copy of the order to the parties immediately to carry out the direction for ends of justice.