IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JAJPUR.
Present: 1.Shri Jiban ballav Das, President,
2.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member
3.Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.
Dated the 25th day of September,2020.
C.C.Case No. 48 of 2019.
Lambodar Bihari , S/O Late Purna ch.Bihari
Vill/ Kankana , P.O.Lalbag,
Dist.- Jajpur . …… ……....Complainant . .
(Versus)
- S.D.O,Electrical NESCO,Jajpur -1,Kalimegha,Jajpur Town,P.O/Dt.Jajpur.
- Executive Engineer,Electrical,NESCO,Jajpur
……………..Opp.Parties.
For the Complainant: Sri L.D.Nayak,Advocate , Advocates .
For the Opp.Parties : Sri P.K.Daspattnaik, Advocate..
Date of order: 25 . 09. 2020.
MISS SMITA RAY , L A D Y M E M B E R .
Deficiency in electrical service is the grievance of the petitioner.
The facts relevant as per complaint petition shortly are that the petitioner is a domestic consumer under the O.Ps bearing consumer No.SJJTT12605 . The petitioner pay the electricity dues in average basis and regularly for which visited the office of O.Ps and requested them for installation of a meter and allowed to pay the dues on actual meter reading but the O.Ps put deaf ear towards the request of the petitioner.
The father of the petitioner had purchased a land in which the new residential house of the petitioner has been constructed to which the O.P supplied the electric line . The successor of the previous land owner and others with the intention to grab the property of the petitioner showing the wrong recording is creating disturbance to the petitioner. The successor of the previous land owner thretend to disconnect the energy line from the premises of the petitioner showing the wrong recording , for which the O.ps are threatening the petitioner to disconnect the energy line from the premises of the petitioner. In case the O.Ps disconnect the line from the premises of the petitioner’s family , the petitioner will suffer a lot without energy. That the land dispute is now subjudice before the court of Tahasildar , Jajpur bearing R.P case No.1185/05.
Accordingly finding no other alternative the petitioner knocked the door of this Commission to direct the O.P not to disconnect the power supply and revised the electric bill by installing a new meter in the premises of the petitioner as well as issue a regular electric bill as per actual meter reading .
After receipt of notice the O.P appeared through their learned advocate and subsequently filed their written version / objection taking the stands:
That the case is not maintainable in the eye of law. The facts narrated in para-1 of the complaint petition are no way disputed by these O.P. The fact stated in para-2 of the complaint petition are half truth. The fact stated in para-3 and 4 of the complain petition are no way related with these O.P. Hence these O>p neither admitted it nor have denied the same. The fact stated in para-5 of the complaint petition are all false and baseless . It is not correct to say that the successor’s of Routray family forced the O>ps to disconnect the energy line from the premises of the petitioner showing wrong recording of R.O.R. The fact stated in para-6 of the complaint petition are all false and baseless. It is not correct to say that instead of installation of electric meter ,in the premises of
the complainant the O.ps threaten to disconnect the power supply from the house of the complainant.
For the reason stated above the complain petition filed by the complainant liable to be dismissed.
On the date of hearing we heard the argument from the learned advocate of both the sides. After perusal of the record and documents in details it is undisputed fact that the petitioner is a domestic consumer under the O.Ps. . As per complaint petition the O.P supplied the electric bill to the petitioner as per load factor basis. The petitioner also stated in his complaint petition that the O.p trying to disconnect the power supply . There is a R.P case bearing case No.1185/05 is pending in the Court of Tahasildar,Jajpur regarding the land dispute. On the other hand the O.P stated in their written version that the complaint petition made by the petitioner is false and baseless and it is not correct to say that the successor of the Routray family forced to disconnect the line and the allegation made by the petitioner regarding installation of meter in the premises of the petitioner is not true and correct. Accordingly without drawing any adverse inference we are inclined to hold that the supply of electric bill / providing power supply without proper meter reading is deficiency of service as per observation of Supreme Court reported in 1997(1)CLT-435-S.C. Hence the dispute is dispose of as per order below :-
The dispute is disposed of on contest. The O.ps are directed to install a tested meter in the premises of the petitioner within 15 days ( fifteen days) after receipt of this order. The O.Ps are also directed to revise the arrear electricity bill of the petitioner as per clause-97 of OERC code-2004 within the stipulated time as per law. Regarding land dispute the O.ps are advised to wait till the disposal of the R.P case No.1185/05 pending before the court of Tahasildar, Jajpur
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 25th day of September,2020. under our hand and seal of the commission.
