Present         (1)     Nisha Nath Ojha,   

                              District & Sessions Judge (Retd.)                                                                                         President

                    (2)      Smt. Karishma Mandal

                              Member                 

Date of Order : 07.08.2015

                    Smt. Karishma Mandal

1. In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite parties:-

1. To direct the opposite parties to modify/reject disputed bill dated 27.07.2013 Rs. 91,956/- and onward.
2. To saddle the opposite parties with special and extra – ordinary costs as deemed fit so as to deter them from adopting such malpractice in future.
3. To pay Rs. 6,000/- as compensation.

2. Brief facts of the case which led to the filing of complaint are as follows:-

1. The complaint case is well within limitation under the law.
2. The relevant facts and the facts leading to filling of present complaint are given in brief hereunder in chronological order for the convenience of your honour:

1. The complainant had applied for electric connection under the scheme Agriculture Connection in working for his boring in the year 1998-99.
2. As per agreement he deposited application fee of Rs. 10 vide receipt no. 488581. Again he deposited estimated cost of Rs. 274/- vide receipt no. 47484 and Rs. 300/- again as security money. The complainant contacted the opposite parties several times requested to connect the electricity line but turned deaf ears by the opposite parties. The written request also did not yield any result.
3. The needed pole for electricity connection has not been placed resulting no wiring up to the place of boring, hence no question of consumption of electricity by the complainant.
4. Through no electricity connection has been provided to the complainant a bill amounting to Rs. 2,698/- indicating the consumer no. 2962 had been sent in the complainant’s name.
5. The complainant protested the billing and the so called consumer number without giving the electricity connection to the complainant vide his letter 28.09.2001 duly received by the office of the opposite party no. 2. ( Vide annexure – 1 )
6. Surprisingly the complainant got the red card for disconnection of electricity and a demand note of Rs. 9,228/- was made by the opposite party on 09.07.20013.
7. The complainant served the protest letter on the opposite party stating the full facts that through electricity connection has not provided to him bill amounting to Rs. 9,228/- with a threat to disconnection the electricity connection was surprising and again requested to give electricity but in vain. ( Vide annexure – 2 )
8. The complainant served the protest letter and requested the opposite party again on 17.05.2008 to give electricity connection which requires wires and supporting poles and also requested to stop further billing and squash the previous bills sent to him. ( Vide annexure – 3 )
9. The complainant requested the opposite party no. 1 to provide wire and supporting poles and to connect the electricity connection and also requested to get the whole issue enquired if the electricity connection has been given.
10. The report of Shri Rakesh Kumar which has been mentioned on the application of the complainant itself states that electricity connection is not available near the tube well of the complainant and providing electricity connection 3 poles and wires are required. It has also been stated that distance from one pole to other is 150 ft. ( Vide annexure – 4 )
11. The complainant received a concocted bill amounting to Rs. 91,956/- for the month of June 2013 though admittedly no electricity has been provided to him as yet.
12. The complainant represented again vide his letter dated 27.06.2013 stating therein the full facts and requested the opposite parties to provide pole and wire in order to give electricity connection to the complainant and also requested to nullify the concocted bill but of no avails. ( Vide annexure – 5 )
13. Neither the reply nor poles wires connected. So much to say that the letter has been replied as yet by the opposite parties.
14. Even after a lapse of more than four months the opposite parties have neither controverted the claim/complaint of the complainant nor has cared to reply the letter. Hence this complaint case has been filed. That the above being the background of the case, the complainant is entitled to maintain and file the present complaint before this forum on the following grounds amongst others, each one of which is without prejudice to others, and seeks the indulgence of this forum to issue directions or orders to the opposite parties deemed appropriate:
15. Such an act and omission on the part of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service, restrictive trade practice and unfair trade practice under the purview of the Consumer Protection Act.
16. The complainant has suffered lot of avoidable mental agonies, physical harassment and financial loss, irreparable loss and injury at the hands of the opposite parties for which the complainant deserves to be amply and suitably compensated in terms of money in the interest of justice.
17. The opposite parties deserve to be saddled with heavy and extra – ordinary costs so that the opposite parties can be deterred from adopting such mal practice in future.
18. The complainant herein deserves to be amply compensation in terms of money for the inconvenience, travelling expenses, for mental agonies, damages, delayed service/no service, interest, and loss suffered due to negligence and dereliction of duties by the opposite parties.

During the course of hearing a letter bearing no. 2073 dated 21.11.2014 of the Electrical Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division Patna ( Rural ) has been received in this forum intimating therein that the bill amount of Rs. 1,08,384/- ( Rs. One Lac Eight Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Four only ) has been cancelled and electric bill too has been closed. The copy of this letter has been made over to the learned counsel of the complainant who has put his initial in token of receipt of this letter.

Heard both the parties and perused the documents available on the record.

In view of the letter dated 21.11.2014, referred to above, the learned counsel of the complainant confined his prayer for compensation and litigation costs only.

Since the complainant has been unnecessarily harassed by the opposite parties and therefore the complainant’s prayer for compensation and litigation costs seems to be reasonable.

We therefore direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay to the complainant Rs. 5,000/- ( Rs. Five Thousand only ) as composite charge for compensation and litigation costs within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order.

Accordingly this case stands allowed to the extent referred above.

                                                  Member                                                             President