The factual matrix in brief is that the complainant, had installed a Brick Industry, name and style as “Fly Ash Brick Industry” at Chhatnaiakata in the district of Boudh and that she started the venture for earning hear livelihood by means of self-employment. She has been availing power supply to the said unit from the O.Ps vide new Consumer No.293001040030 and comes under HT industrial (m) category, the contacted load being 45.00K.W.The only grievance of the complainant is that from February, 2017 to April, 2017 there was low voltage problem for which the unit of the complainant did not function and that she sustained monetary and other loss. In this regard, the complainant intimated the O.Ps for revision of bills from February,2017 to Apri,2017, alleging low voltage problem vide letter dtd.27.6.2017.The complainant strongly objected electricity bills of above three months amounting to Rs.47,314/- and sought for withdrawal of the said bill amount and further claims Rs..10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.2,000/- as cost of litigation.
Per contra, the defense of the O.Ps, interalia, is that the case is not maintainable since the complainant is not a “consumer” as defined in the Act and strongly objected and disputed regarding deficiency in rendering service and objected maintainability on the ground that she is availing power supply under Industrial tariff category. The specific stand of O.Ps is that the low voltage problem as alleged was false and on inquiry it was found that the voltage was as per the standard during period and the complainant was advised by the O.P.No.2 to install shunt capacitor .of appropriate rating in her industry to maintain adequate voltage. Moreover the O.Ps averred that the bill amount of Rs.47, 314/- for the month of Feb, March and April, 2017 have been rightly and lawfully
generated following due procedure.
In consideration of the rival contention, for proper adjunction of the disputes the following issues are material
- Whether the complainant is a “consumer’ as defined under the Act and whether the case is maintainable against the O.Ps or otherwise bad in law.
- Whether low voltage actually persist during February 2017 to Arpir,2017 and the electricity bill as generated during the period against the complainant stands valid.
For brevity and clarity all the issue are taken cumulatively.
At the very outset, taking note of the respective pleadings of the parties and documentary evidence as available, we are satisfied that though the complainant is availing power supply to her unit for commercial purpose, but the same is exclusively to earn her livelihood by means of self-employment as such a “consumer” under the act and also the dispute is pertaining to low voltage problem as such amenable before the Commission and held to be within the period of limitation.
In this case the sole dispute between the parties pertaining to factum of alleged low voltage power supply to the unit of the complainant during February, 2017 to April, 2017. In this regard the complainant had specifically pleaded at para 5 of her complainant and relied on a letter dtd.27.6.2017 wherein she prayed for revision of bills for the aforesaid period alleging therein low voltage problem and illegally generated bills of Rs.47, 314/- .Receive of said letter is admitted by the O.P in his written version at para 9, though strongly denied the factum of low voltage problem. Added to this the complainant has relied on a letter vide No.248 dtd.6.3.2021 of the O.P.No.2, which is a communication, wherein it is categorically admitted as under:-
In this case, said letter of the O.P.No. 2is prior to the institution of this case and can be consideredto be a material documents and relevant to the dispute between the parties, O.P.No.2, being a responsible officer has categorically admitted the factum of low voltage problem and has assigned even cause for such problem. In fact, the documents throw light into the case regarding factum of low voltage. On the other hand the O.Ps have not averred anything nor adduce any evidence from their side contrary to such admission. Law is well settled that facts admitted need not be proved, though it is not conclusive proof of facts admitted. The very said document also corroborated substantially and probablises the version of the complainant. Therefore, we held that the complainant is succeeded to bring into record the factum of law voltage as has been claimed, we are of the view that it is the obligation of distribution licensee to ensure quality of power supply as agreed upon, in other words to maintaindeclared voltage to a consumer is the mandate under OERC (Licensee standard of performance) Regulaiton, 2004, unless it is proved that it is due to reason beyond control of O.Ps. In this case the O.Pshave filed xerox copy of order dtd.23.2.2022, in W.P© 4845 of 2022 of Hon’ble High Court of Odisha, which is pertaining to disconnection of power supply and the present case is regarding low voltage problem and withdrawal of bills illegally generated, as such the same is not taken into consideration. Therefore the issues are in favour of the complainant.
ORDER
The complaint of the complainant be and the same is allowed in part on contest against the OPs. The O.Ps are directed to withdraw thebills of 3 monthsowing to low voltage problem amounting to Rs.47,314/-(Rupees forty seven thousand three hundred and fourteen) only and accordingly regularized the bills of the complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only towards compensation and cost of litigation to the complainant within one month from the date of this order, failingwhich the complainant is at liberty to take steps against the O.Psfor realization of awarded amount.
The final order is typed as per my dictation, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Court on this theday of 10th day of August,2022.
Given under my hand and the seal of the Commission.
