Date of filing:-05/12/2017.
Date of Order:-17/07/2017.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM BARGARH.
Consumer Complaint No.35 of 2014.
Prasanta Kumar Dash, aged about son of Harekrushna Dash, R/o. Hatpadapara, Ward No.3(three), P.o./P.s/Dist- Bargarh.
..... ..... ..... Complainant.
- V e r s u s -
S.D.O., Electrical Division WESCO, Bargarh Division P.o/ P.s/ Dist. Bargarh.
Executive Engineer, B.W.E.A.WESCO, Bargarh At/P.o/P./Dist-Bargarh.
Chairman, Odisha Electricity Regulatory Commission Bidyut Niyamak Bhawan,Unit-VIll, Bhubaneswar-751012. .... ..... ..... Opposite Parties.
Counsel for the Parties.
For the Complainant:- Sri S.P.Mahapatra, Advocate with other Advocates.
For the Opposite Parties:- Sri P.K.Acharya, Advocate with other Advocates.
-: P R E S E N T :-
Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra ..... ..... ..... ..... P r e s i d e n t.
Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r.
Ajanta Subhadarsinee ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r(w).
Dt.17/07/2017 -: J U D G E M E N T :-
Presented by Sri K.P. Mishra, President:-
Brief case of the Complainant;-
In pursuance to the Sec 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 the Complainant begs to files the complaint pertaining to the deficiencies of services caused to him by the Opposite Parties as envisaged here under.
In brief the Complainant is a Consumer having being supplied with the Electric Energy for his domestic purpose by the Opposite Parties vide his Consumer No.4121110504496 for a sanctioned load of 2 Kw energy, in due course of his such use usually 50 to 100 units of electricity was being used by him and for that he was regularly paying the bill time to time, but in the mean time his electric meter was burnt as such he immediately informed about the same to the Opposite Parties as a result of which the said meter was removed and they assured him to install a new one after being sanctioned by the authority and in the mean time power was being supplied to him on an average bill basis on an average of 127, 140, and 154 unit to which the Complainant objected before the Opposite Parties but then the Opposite Parties assured him to rectify the same after installation of the new meter but did not install with new one for years together up to Dt.15.10 2014.
After installation of the new meter the allegation of the Complainant is that it started showing consumption of 716 unit which is far more than the previous meter and the average bills which were being issued to him, so he made immediate complained of the same before the Opposite Parties, but none of them put any heed to that rather went on issuing bill against those meter reading which amounts to deficiencies of service and un-fair trade practice thus the cause of action arose on 2006-07 when the Electric connection was given to him, on Dt.10.07.2011, when the said meter was burnt and Dt.22.11.2014 when the new meter was installed by the Opposite Parties, which gave wrong reading as 716 which was an exceptional to the normal use, and the Opposite Parties did not respond to his complain, for which the complaint prying therein to issue a direction to the Opposite Parties to replace with a new genuine meter, to refund the excess amount paid by him due to the faulty meter reading and excessive bill issued during the average billing before the installation of the new defective meter, and also has prayed for an amount of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand) only as compensation for the mental agony he has undergone during these period due to the deficiencies and un-fair trade practice of the Opposite Parties. The Complainant has filed some documents as mentioned below for the perusal of the Forum, substantiating his case.
Xerox copy of the Estimate Notice vide 216 of 2006-07.
Electricity bill of August -07, Oct-08, Oct -2014.
Bill for the month of Feb, April, May, June-2014.
Perused the Complaint, the documents, filed on his behalf and on hearing the Advocate for the Complainant the case was admitted and on being served with the notice from the Forum the Opposite Parties appeared through their Advocate and filed their version. In the version the Opposite Parties have denied the allegation of the Complainant so far the excess bill amount is concerned while admitting the contract to supply of the electric energy of 2 Kw and has claimed therein that rightly the bill amount has been issued against the use of the same after installation of the new meter in the year 2014 in the month of May, further they have contended with regard to the testing of the correctness of the said new meter installed as it is alleged to be defective one then it could be sent to the testing laboratories by paying Rs.50/-(Rupees fifty)only as testing cost and has agreed to the condition that if it would be found to be defective then the bill which has been given to the complainant would be revised and excess amount collected would be refunded.
While coming across the complaint, version and their respective documents, we feel it necessary to examine two vital issues before us Firstly whether the Opposite Parties are deficient in giving proper service to the Complainant, Secondly whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief as he has sought for.
Having gone through the entire materials available in the record and on hearing the counsel for the respective parties, while dealing with the question as to whether there is any deficiencies of service on the part of the Opposite Parties, it came to our notice that in the initial stage when the first meter was burnt and the same was reported to the Opposite Parties, they have removed the same meter immediately in the year 2011 by then the meter reading as per the case of the complaint was within 50 to100 unit and accordingly billing was being made but after the removal of the same meter being burnt, it has been found that the billing amount has been raised beyond the consumption as alleged by the Complainant and being informed they have given assurances to adjust after installation of the new meter, so as to what prevented them to install a new meter immediately with a short span of time and has lingered for the same till Dt-15.10.2014. Had it been so then the dispute regarding the excess amount in average bill would not have raised, further it came to our notice that after the installation of the new meter the allegation of the defect in the same in billing beyond the consumption of the same has come up and it was informed to the Opposite Parties but in such stage also the Opposite Parties seemed to be neglecting in taking quick action in testing whether it was really defective one or not.
Further more it is seen from the record that the required amount of Rs.50/-(Rupees fifty)only as asked by the Opposite Parties for testing the alleged defective meter has been deposited by the Complainant and to that effect the Forum have passed an order and have directed the Opposite Party No.1(one) for testing of the same on Dt-04.01.2017 and to report within fifteen days from the date of order.
But in spite of the order of the Forum for testing the alleged meter and to submit the report of the same before the Forum the Opposite Parties have turned down the same and have installed another meter at their own with out removing the old alleged defective meter as has been displayed by the Complainant through a photo copy hanging two said meters in one wall side by side which amounts to deficiencies of service and commission of gross disobedience to the order of the Forum for which are liable for legal action as per the provision of the Act.
Further such activities has strengthen the allegation of the Complainant that they have committed deficiencies in rendering proper service to him and have played unfair trade practice, In furtherance to our observation it is seen from the initial stage of the installation of the electricity connection to the Complainant and further episode of the action of the opposite parties, are very much deficient and arbitrary in nature which is violative of the principle of natural justice. Hence our views goes In favor of the Complainant and answered accordingly.
So far as the question of the relief sought for by the Complainant is concerned, it is pertinent to mention that above all, the Opposite Parties have contended in their version in it’s paragraph No. 2 that in case the Complainant is not satisfied with the function of the installation of the alleged meter in the year 2014, as not functioning properly then he is to deposit the required fees for testing of the same in the prescribed testing laboratories and in the event of any discrepancy found with the same then the Opposite Parties would revise the bill for the alleged period and accordingly the Complainant prayed before the Forum for such testing to which the Advocate for the Opposite Parties also consented and accordingly the order was passed by the forum directing the Complainant to deposite the fees amounting to Rs.50/-(Rupees fifty)only and also directed the Opposite Parties to send the same for the test and to report within fifteen days from the date of order, but the Opposite Parties instead of sending the same meter for the test has installed another meter adjoining to the said defective meter, which proves the callousness and their irresponsible behavior which amounts to the deficiencies of service coupled with unfair trade practice on their part. Hence our views goes in favor of the Complainant and answered accordingly for which the Opposite Parties are jointly and severally liable. In the result the complaint is allowed against the Opposite Parties. Hence order follows.
-: O R D E R :-
In view of the above facts and circumstances the Opposite Parties are directed to install a fully tested new meter and are directed to rectify the bill for the period from Dt-10.07.2011 to Dt. 15.10.2014 in proportion to the earlier bills at par with the bill giving reading by the burnt meter and also directed to refund the excess amount which has been collected from the Complainant in the name of average bill with an interest @ of 9%(nine percent) per annum, from the date of filing of the case till the date of Order, also the Opposite Parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand)only in lieu of compensation to the Complainant for the physical harassments and mental agony undergone by him due to such action of the Opposite Parties within thirty days from the date of the pronouncement of the order, in default of which the amount would accrue an interest @18%(eighteen percent) till the actual realization of the same amount and also would be liable for the penal provision of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 in it’s strict sense. The Order is pronounced in the open Forum to-day i.e on Dt.17.07.2017.
Accordingly the case is disposed off.
Typed to my dictation
and corrected by me.
(Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra)
P r e s i d e n t.
I agree, I agree,
(Ajanta Subhadarsinee) (Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash)
M e m b e r. M e m b e r
