At the time of hearing before admission, we have decided to dispose of this appeal finally.

          Brief facts, giving rise to this appeal are that:-

1.      Respondent / Complainant is the consumer of appellant / o.p. (for the sake of brevity the respondent is hereinafter referred as ‘complainant’ and appellant as ‘o.p.’) Electric connection for domestic purpose is given to the complainant, having consumer No. 390010233189. Complainant used to pay electricity bill regularly. It is alleged that on 20.09.2010 complainant made a complaint with the o.p. that the meter is faulty. Thereafter, concerned officer of the o.p. visited the house of complainant and replaced the meter. Thereafter, a bill issued for Rs.48,287.20. Thereafter, when the complainant visited the office of the o.p. he was directed to pay an amount of Rs.30,000/- till 25.06.2011. Therefore, the complainant made the complaint with District Consumer Forum, Wardha.

2.      In response to the complaint notice o.p. appeared before District Consumer Forum, Wardha and resisted the complaint vide its Written Version, contending inter alia that the bill of Rs.48,287.20, given to the complainant, is correct, etc. It is contended that till the month of April 2011 average bill was issued without taking meter reading as it was installed at high level and therefore it was difficult to note down the meter reading, etc. Thereafter, in the month of May 2011, bill was issued as per meter reading, etc. It is submitted that there was no deficiency in service on the part of o.p.

3.      On hearing both the sides and considering the documents on record, the District Consumer Forum, Wardha held that there was deficiency in service on the part of o.p. as the o.p. initially issued the electric bills without taking meter reading and thereafter in the month of April issued the bill of excess amount, etc. In keeping with these findings, the District Consumer Forum partly allowed the complaint as noted above.

4.      Feeling aggrieved by the judgement & order the o.p. preferred this appeal.

5.      At the stage of hearing before admission, we heard counsel for both the sides and considering the facts of the case, we decided to dispose of this appeal at the stage of admission itself.

6.      It is submitted by Mr Ganvir, Ld. Counsel for the o.p. that prior to the month of April 2011, average monthly bills were issued for 9 months without taking meter reading and in the month of May 2011 the bill of Rs.48,287.20 was issued as per the consumption of electricity shown in the meter. It is submitted that earlier meter readings could not noted down as the meter was installed at high level, which was not accessible, etc. But this submission is not at all acceptable because when admittedly the meter was installed at the house of complainant, that too by the employees of the o.p. itself. Even if it is presumed that the meter was installed at high level and meter reading could not be taken, it cannot be the fault of the consumer – complainant but it is the deficiency on the part of o.p. only. It is not disputed by Mr Ganvir, Ld. Counsel for the o.p. that as per the rules under Electricity Act, the o.p. is required to issue the monthly bill to its consumer by taking a meter reading and it cannot issue average bill without taking meter reading, when meter is installed. Therefore, the District Consumer Forum, has rightly held that there was deficiency in service on the part of o.p. and rightly awarded the compensation, restraining the o.p. to recover the disputed bill amount.

7.      We find no error or any illegality in the impugned judgement & order and therefore, no interference is warranted.

8.      In the result, the appeal is being devoid of any merit, it liable to be dismissed summarily.

          Hence, the following order:-

i.        Appeal stands dismissed.

ii.       No order as to cost.

iii.      Copy of this order be supplied to the parties.