Miss Gita Verma, Judicial Member

Dated: 01.02.2024

Order

1. This appeal by O.Ps has been filed against the order dated 19.07.2018 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, East Champaran in Complaint case no. 138 of 2017 by which the complaint was allowed in part and the O.Ps were ordered to prepare revised electricity consumption bill of the complainant @ average 77 units per month with effect from July, 2017 to July 2018 (total 13 months) amounting to Rs. 7,007/- and give it to her for making payment within 4 weeks failing which to pay to her interest on the aforesaid amount @9% per annum. They were further ordered to pay Rs. 2,000/- to the complainant as litigation cost.
2. The case of complainant is that she is a consumer of electricity having consumer no. ID-MOT/MT 22457/9616 and the O.Ps are his electricity suppliers. She had made payment of all the bills sent by O.Ps upto 13.06.2017. But in October 2017 she received a bill of Rs. 20,082/- which was highly inflated in comparison to her monthly average consumption. She placed her grievance before the O.Ps and requested them to make necessary correction in the bill but they did not accept her request. So, she filed the complaint.
3. The O.Ps appeared, filed a written statement and contested the claim in which they asserted that the bill in question was correct. So, the complaint was liable to be dismissed.
4. At the time of hearing of this appeal the complainant-respondent or her counsel did not appear. The counsel for appellants appeared and submitted that the grievance of complainant had already been redressed by his clients. So, the complainant-respondent was left with no interest in this appeal. For this reason the complainant or her counsel is not pursuing this case. In support of this submission he has filed photocopy of letter no. 973/ESD/MTH/Legal/544/2022 dated 01.04.2022 sent to him by O.P. no. 2 in which it has been stated that the complainant has deposited electricity bill upto March 2022 and now there is no outstanding dues against her. He has further submitted that in view of aforesaid development the impugned order has become infructuous. Therefore, the appeal may be disposed of in the light of these facts and litigation cost of Rs. 2,000/- granted by District Forum in the impugned order may be set aside.
5. Having regard to the above mentioned submission and letter it is found and held that the impugned order has become infructuous. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

Md. Shamim Akhtar                                                                                                  Gita Verma

 Judicial Member                                                                                                   Judicial Member

 Md. Fariduzzama