DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: BHADRAK
Dated the 6th day of July, 2020
C.D Case No. 18 of 2018
Present 1. Shri Raghunath Kar, President
2. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Member
3. Afsara Begum, Member
Sri Ananta Charan Behera
S/o Late Maguni Charan Behera
At/Po: Kumbharia,
Ps: Bhandaripokhari,
Dist: Bhadrak, Odisha
……………………. Complainant
(Versus)
1. Sub-Divisional Officer, (Electrical), NESCO Utility, Dhamnagar
At/Po/Ps: Dhamnagar,
Dist: Bhadrak
2. The Junior Engineer, (Electrical), Bhandaripokhari
At/Po/Ps: Bhandaripokhari,
Dist: Bhadrak
3. The Executive Engineer, Electrical
South Electrical Division
At: Aradi Chhak,
Po/Ps/Dist: Bhadrak
……………………..Opp. Parties
Counsel For Complainant: Sri S. Tripathy, Adv & Others
Counsel For the O.Ps: Smt. Gayatri Pradhan D. Manager (Legal)
Date of hearing: 27.11.2019
Date of order: 06.07.2020
BASANTA KUMAR MALLICK, MEMBER
This dispute arises out of a complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice against the O.Ps.
The facts of the case as narrated in the complaint are to the effect that the complainant is a old man of more than 70 years and also a consumer under O.Ps vide consumer No. GE1086 corresponds to new consumer No. 42211208952. When the complainant found the meter installed in his premises is not functioning properly, he met and requested OP No. 2 for change of the meter and to revise the bill which is much higher than the earlier monthly bills. OP No. 2 assured the complainant to bring the facts to the notice of OP No. 1 & 3 and would take appropriate action to replace the defective meter with new one but did not do anything for replacement of the meter and went on serving the energy bill on the complainant for years together. But all on a sudden the OP No. 2 intimated the complainant to attend the settlement camp to be held at the office of OP No. 2 on 21.12.2017. Accordingly complainant attended the settlement camp and put forth his grievances, which was favorably considered by the O.Ps and finally it is settled for a sum of Rs 17,584/- to be paid by the complainant to squire up the dues covering the period from April, 2002 to September, 2007. Accordingly the complainant instantly paid an amount of Rs 17,600/- on 21.12.2017 to clear up all the dues outstanding against him. On the other hand after five months, O.Ps sent a notice to the complainant vide letter No. 39 dt. 10.01.2018 demanding the complainant to pay an amount of Rs 12,160/- in addition to Rs 17,584/- as the earlier calculation was, to certain extent, wrong and the one time settlement made on 21.12.2017 stands cancelled. The complainant protested the claim of the O.Ps in meeting personally to the O.Ps in their respective offices which did not yield any result. The complainant being disappointed by the activities of O.Ps took shelter in the Consumer Forum, Bhadrak praying for justice and prayed to issue a direction to O.Ps not to levy the additional amount of Rs 12,160/- along with cost and compensation.
O.Ps resisted the claim of the complainant and contested the case. In submitting written version O.Ps stated that the calculation made in the camp held at Bhandaripokhari Section Office on 21.12.2017 covering the period from April, 2002 to September, 2007 was not done properly as there was huge crowed gathering. Secondly the revision made at Bhandaripokhari Section Office was done manually which was found incorrect and subsequently on 10.01.2018 issued a letter to the complainant intimating him to pay an amount of Rs 12,160/- in addition to earlier payment to clear up the dues up to September, 2017. With regards to payment of Rs 4,252/- was not towards one time settlement but the said amount has been paid towards his arrear dues before the settlement. It is further stated by the O.Ps that the onetime settlement benefit was availed by the complainant in the month of March, 2016 and further benefit cannot be allowed to the complainant for the same period during year 2017. In the light of above submission it is clear that the allegations made in the complaint are not tenable for which liable to be dismissed.
Gone through the complaint of the complainant, written version of O.Ps, perused the materials on record, heard the complainant & O.Ps and observed as discussed below.
Admittedly the complainant is a consumer under O.Ps and had been paying the energy bills regularly before the meter installed by the O.Ps in the premises of the complainant went out of order. It is also an admitted fact that the complainant has paid Rs 17,600/- at revision camp on the decision of the O.Ps present at the onetime settlement camp. Subsequently the O.Ps differed on the settled amount taking the plea that the amount arrived under onetime settlement scheme was done manually which is not actual and real. All other allegations made by the complainant are disputed.
1. At the outset of hearing the counsel of the complainant submitted that when the meter installed in his premises was found defective, he has personally met OP No. 1 & 2 for installation of a new meter which was ignored by the O.Ps for years together as a result of which the units consumed is shown in the bills is much higher than the actual bills served by the O.Ps earlier. Basing on the reading of defective meter, the O.Ps charged huge arrear in the subsequent bills and also threatened to disconnect power supply to the premises of the complainant. However the O.Ps intimated the complainant over phone to attend the onetime settlement camp on 21.12.2017 at the office of the OP No. 2. Accordingly the complainant remained physically present at the settlement camp where he produced all previous bills. Taking the submitted facts into consideration, O.Ps once again recalculated and arrived at the conclusion that the complainant would pay a sum of Rs 17,584/- to clear up the arrear amount which covers the period from April, 2002 to September, 2007. The complainant instantly made payment of Rs 17,600/- vide receipt No. 286374 to squire up the arrear dues mentioning all the arrear dues up to September, 2017 is cleared up. The said money receipt bears the signature of Junior Engineer Electrical (Section- 1) Bhandaripokhari. It is evident from the money receipt that as mentioned above that the complainant has cleared up his liabilities towards arrear energy bill up to September, 2017. Subsequent notice served by the O.Ps on the complainant demanding payment of Rs 12,160/- is illegal which proves the Act of unfair trade practice of the O.Ps. On the contrary the O.Ps argued that the amount settled at onetime settlement camp was wrong as the calculation was made manually amidst the crowd which was detected subsequently and the complainant has to pay an amount of Rs 12,160/- in addition to earlier payment of Rs 17,584/-.
Heard the parties and perused material on record. The money receipt issued by the O.Ps on dt. 21.12.2017 for an amount of Rs 17,600/- and the statement of Junior Engineer Electrical on the backside of the receipt clearly proves that the complainant has paid off all his arrear dues up to September, 2017. The plea taken by the O.Ps calculation made manually amid the crowd was wrong and not acceptable and the payment made by the complainant under onetime settlement stands final. It is further observed that for the mistake done by the O.Ps, the poor complainant should not suffer.
2. As regards payment of Rs 5,141/- by the advice of O.Ps towards arrear is not supported by any evidence for which the allegation made by the complainant is not sustainable.
Under the above premises and taking the facts and figures into consideration this Forum is of the opinion that the O.Ps have demanded for payment of Rs 12,160/- towards arrear charges after settlement made on 22.12.2017 is illegal and unfair and such act proves that the O.Ps have caused deficiency of service and resorted to unfair trade practice.
ORDER
In the result, the complaint be and the same is allowed in part against the O.Ps. O.Ps are directed to charge the energy bill on the subsequent period from the date of onetime settlement i.e. on 21.12.2017. Further the O.Ps are restrained to charge any arrear up to September, 2017 and the notice served on 10.01.2018 on the complainant stands null and void and the O.Ps are directed to Pay Rs 1,000/- towards cost of litigation which would be adjusted to the subsequent bills. This order must be complied within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt failing which the O.Ps have to pay additional amount of Rs 1,000/- as compensation for delay in implementation of order.
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 6th July, 2020 under my hand and seal of the Forum.
