The grievance of the complainant is that he is a beneficiary consumer of the Opposite Parties vide consumer No. 713101470022 of the Opposite Parties. He was regularly paying the Electricity bills of the O.Ps till March, 2014. He had received a bill for Rs. 76/- for the month of March-April, 2014 and thereafter he received a bill for Rs. 642/- on 22.11.2014 but surprisingly on 20.1.2015 he has received an exaggerated bill demanding a sum of Rs 91,905/- bill of December, 2014 which is extremely high in compare to previous consumptions and such demand by the O.Ps without any reason and thus exaggeration has caused him financial loss, mental agony and physical harassment Hence he has approached this forum for the protection and relief as per his prayer.
Despite receipt of notice, the Opposite Parties neither appeared nor filed their written version hence, Ops are set ex-parte.
In the absence of any representation from the Opposite Parties and having gone through the documents and all other evidence placed before us by the Complainant. In course of hearing we have gone through the bill of October, 2014 wherein Rs. 642/- was demanded from the complainant as electric charges wherein Rs. 538/- is shown as arrear of previous months. Raising to Rs. 91,905/- from Rs, 642/- is complete illigal and either wrong or defective.
. We are of the considered opinion that due to the fault on the part of the Opposite Parties, they remained silent without rebutting the allegation of the complainant and did not choose to file their written version in this case.
We come across a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Vidya Dhar-versus-Munkif Rao and another reported in 1992(2) Civil Court Cases at page-91 held that “ if a party did not adduce any evidence in rebuttal, then adverse inference should drawn against the party for not rebutting the evidence”.
We are fortified by a decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir in the matter of Fiat India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Dr. Zahid Hussain Gillari and others reported in 2003 CTJ 953(CP) wherein the Hon’ble High Court held that “it is well settled that where the averments made in the complaint are un-rebutted, the presumption is that the averments are true and correct”.
Keeping in view the above referred case laws, which are applicable on the facts and circumstances of the case, we have come to the conclusion that complaint is tenable. We find that the Opposite Party No- 1 & 2 are deficient in service and committed unfair trade practice in this case for which the complainant is entitled to an appropriate order in terms of Section 14 of the C.P. Act. Hence, we proceed to pass the following order. Hence it is ORDERED :
ORDER
The bill of August-September-2014 issued against the complainant be quashed. The opposite party is directed issue proper bill under the provision of law and deduct the total payments made by the complainant from the total amounts.. The Forum also ordered the O.Ps to pay Rs. 3,000/ - to complainant as compensation for mental agony and Rs.2,000/- as cost of the case within 30 days from the date of the order.
The complaint petition allowed.
Copy of the order be communicated to the Parties as per rules.
Delivered in open forum on this the 30th October, 2015.
