Fact of the case in short is that Smt. KalyaniChakraborty is the Consumer of electricity under the O.P. having Consumer ID No.232007873, Installation No.965049 and she has been paying charge of electricity according to meter reading regularly.  On March – 2013 she came to know that the meter of the case service connection became out of order showing meter reading 21296 units.  Then she reported the meter to the O.P. ; but O.P. without replacing the said meter by a new meter started sending electric bill estimated on the basis of average consumption and this Complainant also paid the amount of the said electric bill as she had no alternative.

On 21-07-2015 O.P. replaced the said defective meter by a new one.  O.P. also was sending electric bill mentioning estimated adjustment units 1535.  This Complainant made protest and O.P. assured that the corrected bill will be sent ; but all on a sudden on 05-11-2015 the service connection of the Complainant was disconnected without giving any notice.

Thereafter, husband of the Complainant made protest about the bill amount on 06-11-2015 ; but O.P. did not pay any heed and asked her to deposit amount of bill.  So, the Complainant compelled to pay the amount of the exorbitant bill.  The ordinary consumption is 300 units per month.  So, the Complainant has challenged the disputed bill for the month of September – 2015 to November – 2015 as exaggerated and baseless. So, the Complainant has filed this case through her constituted Attorney and prayed for asking O.P. to prepare bill as per actual consumption and also made prayer for compensation to the tune of Rs.15,40,000/-  and other reliefs.

In this case O.P. appeared by appointing advocate ; but subsequently, O.P. has abandoned this case.  So, this case was heard exparte.

The following documents are marked as exhibit :-

1)  Electric bills are marked as exhibit – 1 series.

2)  Payment Receipt are marked as exhibit – 2 series.

Decision with reasons.

In this case Ld. Advocate for the Complainant argued inter alia after drawing our attention to disputed bills exhibit – 1 (h) and other bills and argued that the impugned bill have been sent claiming Rs.23,697/- showing estimated / adjustment unit 1535.  This Complainant never consumed such units in her service connection.  So, this amount of bill is exorbitant and she has also made further argument that Complainant is also entitled to compensation for her harassment and mental agony.

We have carefully heard the submissions made by the Ld. Advocate for the Complainant.

Perused the exhibited documents and the materials on record.  It appears from disputed bill exhibit – 1(h) that this is a bill for the months of September – 2015 to November – 2015 prepared showing units consumed 0.00 estimated / adjustment unit 1535.  So, it is clear to us that this disputed bill was not prepared according to meter reading.  So, it will be presumed that during this period meter of the ca se service connection was out of order.  Otherwise this bill would be prepared / estimated on the basis of meter reading.  It reveals from the materials on record that this Complainant submitted application for granting interim order for restoration of electricity stating inter alia that Complainant has made payment entire amount of the disputed bill along with disconnection and re-connection charge.  It also reveals from exhibit – 2(b) that Rs.23,998/-  was paid by the Complainant and obtained this money receipt on 06-11-2015.  So, it is clear to us that this Complainant has made full payment of the amount of the disputed bill on 06-11-2015 i.e.  before filing this case.  There is nothing on record to show that said amount of disputed bill has beenpaid on protest.  Electric line of the Complainant has been restored on the basis of interim orderpassed by this Forum though it was alleged in the petition of complaint that the service connection of the Complainant was disconnected.  No electric bills had been submitted by Complainantshowing consumption of electricity 300 units per month, previous to the disputed bill or previous to the period of when meter went out of order to

prove the ordinary consumption of electricity as claimed in the petition of complaint.  So, it is clear to us that Complainant has filed this case when O.P. fails to restore electric connection despite deposit of amount of disputed electric bill.

So, we hold that cause of action of this case is not for claiming the amount of case bill by O.P. ; but for restoration of electric connection, which has been restored, during pendency of this case on the basis of interim order passed by this Forum ; if this Complaint would deposit the amount of disputed bill after filing of the case with order of this Forum then it can be said that there was cause of action.

In view of above facts & circumstances, we hold that there is no cause of action for filing this case at present.

So, we hold that Complainant could not be able to satisfy us about her claim of her ordinary consumption of electricity 300 units per month.  So, we hold that Complainant could not be able to prove by submitting oral and documentary evidence that the assessment of consumption estimated in the disputed bill is exorbitant, arbitrary and baseless.  Moreover, electric connection has been restored and Complainant has paid the entire amount of the disputed bill before filing of this case without any protest.  So, we hold that there is also no cause of action for relief as stated in the petition of complaint.  So, we hold that the complaint is liable to be dismissed as Complainant has not been able to prove her case.

In the result the complaint fails.

Hence, it is

Ordered

The Complaint No.129 of 2015be and same is hereby dismissed exparte ; but without cost.

Let plain copy of this Judgement be given to the both sides and another plain copy of Judgement be also sent by registered post with A.D. to the O.P. for Complainant with direction made in the Judgment.