1. Brief fact of the case is that he is a consumer under O.P. having been availed the electricity service vide consumer no. 713101030116.  Submissions of complainant is that he has cleared all the dues till November, 2015 and was issued with a letter to that effect from the O.P. vide their memo no. 212(2) dated 07.11.2015 and accordingly, new connection was provided to him vide no. 712101030116.  The allegations of complainant is that due to financial problems, he deposited the due amount on partly basis, but the O.P. issued a letter showing the arrear of Rs. 29,953/- which is more than the amount which was paid as on 07.11.2015.  In this regards several times he approached the O.P. to enquiry the matter, but did not get any result.Thus being mentally harassed, he filed this case with a prayer to direct the O.P to waive out the illegal dues and to pay Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation and costs of litigation to him.

2.  The O.P. appeared and filed their counter admitting the complainant is having electricity connection vide consumer no. 713101030116.  It is contended that they have visited the premises of complainant on 20.12.2014 and found the power supply without any meter for which they prepared the final assessment for Rs. 13,601/-. It is also contended that due to non payment the amount goes upto Rs. 29,952/- till 11/2019 as such they have sent notice to the complainant for deposit of such amount and with other contentions showing their non liability, they prayed to dismiss the case.

3. Parties have filed their respective documents in support of their submissions.  Perused the case record and material documents available therein.

4. It is an admitted fact that the complainant is having electricity connection vide consumer no. 713101030116.  The allegation of complainant is that though he has cleared all the dues, but the O.P. illegally demanded more than the settled amount made between them.  Whereas the contentions of O.P. is that they have demanded the arrear dues from the complainant.  Complainant filed the letter of O.P. vide their memo no. 212(3) dated 07.11.2015.  We have gone through the said document and found that there was a dispute between the parties u/s 135 of The Electricity Act, 2003, which was settled for Rs. 12,000/- as on 07.11.2015 out of total provisional assessment of Rs. 45,020/- for the period from 12/12 to 11/2014 and accordingly the higher authority of O.P. made direction for not to proceed u/s 135 of their Act.  It is also found that the said deposited amount of Rs. 12,000/- have not been shown in the statement of complainant, whereas the O.P. has entered an amount of Rs. 13,601/- as sundry on 12/2016 as per the final assessment made for the period from 12/2013 to 11/2014 in a belated state that too after lapse of more than two years.

5. At the time of hearing, O.P. argued that the complainant has consumed the electricity till 5/2020 which amounting to Rs. Rs. 31,601/- which include the arrear dues since 2015 and payment for electricity consumption.  On intervention of the Fora, the complainant deposited an amount of Rs. 18,000/- on 12.06.2020 vide receipt no. 684848 with the O.P. out of total amount of Rs. 31,601/-. It is ascertained that to recover the balance amount of Rs. 13,601/-, the O.P. neither made any attempt by issuing specific prior notice nor have approached to any Forum or any Court of Law which as per section 56 (1) (2) of The Electricity Act, 2003, is highly essential. Further the O.P. utterly failed to prove their submission to the effect that they have issued 15 days prior notice in writing to the complainant for recovery of the balance arrear amount.  Hence we feel, the O.P. have failed to discharge their duty as per the above provision and demanding such amount at a belated stage that too after lapse of more than two years from the date of its first day of non payment, in our view, is not accordance with law.  Further it is ascertained that the complainant has not paid the monthly consumption bill amount regularly.  Hence we feel there is deficiency on both side i.e. complainant and O.P.  In the case between State of Tripura & others Vrs Joyshankar Saha, Hon’ble National Commission has held the same view. 

6. Considering the above discussion, we feel, complainant though have a prima facie for the deficiency in service on the part of the O.P., but he is also having the same deficiency in service on his part.  Hence this order.

                                                                                                                 ORDER

    The complainant petition is allowed partly with no compensation and no costs.  Complainant is directed to deposit the monthly consumption bill amount regularly.  The O.P. is herewith directed to waive out only the arrear balance amount of Rs. 13,601/- imposed on the complainant, being demanded at a belated stage. 

    Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 9^th day of September, 2020.

    Issue free copy to the parties concerned.