1.       Heard Mr. Amit Kumar learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant on the limitation petition and on merits.

2.      He  submitted  that  the appellant  has  been  directed  to  adjust  the excess  amount paid  by the complainant, which the  appellant agreed   and  therefore, there  was  no  deficiency in service  and there  was  no need for order  for  payment of compensation  and  litigation  cost.

3.      The  grievance of the complainant  was that inspite of changing  the meter on 21.03.2010, the  appellant issued electricity  bills  on  average basis  which  the  complainant  continued  to pay  with repeated  requests   to correct  the  bills. But nothing was done.

4.      The appellant  filed  an application  before  learned  District Forum  on 26.07.2011, saying that  on  verification it  was  found  that  excess  payment was received  from  the  complainant,  which  would be   adjusted,  and  order  may  be  passed  in  that  regard. The learned District Forum directed the complainant  to inform  the appellant about the  details  of excess  payment   so  that   it  can be  adjusted  after  verification. As the appellant did not take any action on the requests of  the  complainant  for  adjustment  of  the  excess  payment, and the appellant agreed  to adjust  excess  payment  only during  the hearing, the  appellant  was  directed  to pay  Rs. 5000/- (Rupees  Five  thousand)  as  compensation  for  mental harassment  and  Rs. 2000/- (Rupees Two thousand) as litigation cost within 30 days  failing  which  the said amount  will be  paid  with interest  @  9%  p.a.  

5.      After  hearing  Mr. Amit  Kumar  and going  through  the  materials  placed  before  us, we find  that  even  if  the  delay  of  about  69 days  is ignored no grounds are made out for interfering with the impugned  order. Accordingly this appeal is dismissed.