Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/28/2017

K.R.Janardhan S/o Rama Iyyengar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Assistant Executive Engineer (Elec) - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.P.S.Sathyanaryanarao

19 May 2018

ORDER

 

COMPLAINT FILED ON:15/03/2017

DISPOSED      ON:19/05/2018

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

 

C.C.NO: 28/2017

 

DATED: 19^th MAY 2018

PRESENT: - SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH  : PRESIDENT                                   B.A., LL.B.,

                   SRI.N. THIPPESWAMY        : MEMBER

                          B.A., LL.B., PGDCLP  

 

……COMPLAINANT/S	K.R. Janardhan, S/o Rama Iyengar, Age: 50 Years, Huliyar Road, Infront of Ganesha Temple, Kitturu Rani Channamma Circle, Hiriyur, Chitradurga District.   (Reptd. By Sri. P.S.Sathyanarayana Rao, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	1. The Assistant Executive Engineer (Ele), BESCOM, Hiriyur Sub-Division, Hiriyur.   2. The Executive Engineer (Ele), BESCOM, Chitradurga Division, Chitradurga.   3. The Superintending Engineer(Ele), Administration Office, Chitradurga Region, BESCOM, Chitradurga.   (Reptd. By Sri. C.S. Kireeti Shetty, Advocate)

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH:   PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of the C.P Act, 1986 for the relief to direct the OPs to pay Rs.25,000/-towards damages, Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony, Rs.5,000/- towards costs and such other reliefs.  

2.      The brief facts of the case of the above complainant is that, he is the customer of OPs having RR No.6604 to his godown situated at Hiriyur, which was used for commercial purpose.  It is further submitted that, the godown was kept vacant since from two years, the same has been informed to the OP No.1 by the complainant vide letter dated 23.12.2014 and the complainant was paying Rs.60/- p.m as minimum charges towards electricity.  After that, the complainant has obtained customer history statement from the OP, which shows that, the complainant used the consumption of units and tariff from 22.06.2013 to 22.12.2015 and the OP No.1 has charged heavy amount by fixing 161 units p.m from June 2014 to December 2014.  Even the complainant has not used the electricity, the OP No.1 has charged with consumption of 161 units blindly.  In this regard, the complainant has informed to the OP No.1.  Even then the OP No.1 has charged heavy bill which clearly goes to show that, there is a dereliction of duties and deficiency in service on the part of OPs.  The OPs are well aware of the vacant position of the gowdown and the bills are coming under computerized shara as MNR i.e., Meter Not Running.  Then, how this amount comes, how much, the complainant has to pay to the OPs.  In this behalf, the complainant has approached the OPs requesting to send the revised bill so far as to clear of the dues.  Till now, the OPs have not send the revised bill.  On 05.12.2015, the OP No.1 has send the statement, bill shows that, the complainant is due for a sum of Rs.11,166/-.  But there is no any specific clarification in this bill.  After receipt of the bill, the complainant approached the OP and requested to revise the bill but, the OPs have not taken any care for it.  Then the complainant got issued legal notice on 01.09.2016 to the OPs to clarify with regard to the amount pertains to June 2014 to December 2014.  Till now the OPs have not complied the notice and not furnished the accurate bill to the complainant, which is a deficiency in service.  The complainant is the customer of OPs by availing electricity connection by paying electric bill amount.  Hence, the complainant is a consumer.  The cause of action for this complaint arose on 01.09.2016 when the complainant has send the legal notice to the OPs and the OPs have acknowledged the same on 07.09.2016 which is within the jurisdiction of this Forum and hence prayed for allow his complaint.    

3.      After service of notice, OPs appeared through Sri. C.S. Kireeti Shetty, Advocate and filed their version.  According to the version filed by OPs, the entire allegations made in para 3 to 6 of the complaint are denied as false.  But, the OPs have accepted that, the complainant is due for a sum of Rs.11,166/- as on 05.12.2015.  Further it is admitted that, the complainant is having electricity connection vide RR No.6604 for commercial purpose.  The complainant has consumed 493 units of electricity to his godown.  The meter reader of the OPs has visited the complainant premises for meter reading then, he came to know that, meter was not recording and the same has been informed by the OPs Meter Reader in the month of July 2014.  Further in view of the Karnataka Electricity Supply Regulation Act, immediately after identification of MNR, the OPs shall take three months average consumption of electricity consumed by the consumer.  In view of the said Act, the OPs have raised bill for 161 units from the month of July 2014 and each and every month, the OPs have given bills regularly to the complainant.  But, the complainant never objected when the OPs have given bill and further it is the duty of the complainant to pay the interest at the rate of 1% per mensm on the arrears.  In the month of December 2015, the complainant has paid Rs.4,000/- towards consumption charges and further the complainant has paid the arrears of Rs.12,872/- for the period from June 2014 to June 2016.  Further, the complainant is in arrears of Rs.13,612/- and he is liable to pay the interest at the rate of 1% per mensm on the arrears.  When once the DCB has been raised by the OPs, they have no right to cancel the consumption charges and therefore, there is no deficiency on their part and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.      The complainant has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-8 were got marked and closed his side.  On behalf of OPs, one Smt. Nagarathnamma, Assistant Executive Engineer has examined as DW-1 by filing affidavit and no documents have been got marked and closed their side.     

5.      Arguments heard.

6.      Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaints are that;

 

1. Whether the complainants prove that, OPs have committed deficiency in service in fixing the consumption charges to the RR No.6604 of the complainant when he gave letter to disconnect the electricity to his godown and entitled for the relief as prayed for?

              (2) What order?

          7.      Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

          Point No.1:- Partly in affirmative.

          Point No.2:- As per final order.

REASONS

8.      Point No.1:-  It is not in dispute that, the complainant has obtained electricity connection vide RR No.6604 to his godown premises which is situated in front of Ganesh Temple, Huliyar Road, Hiriyur.  The complainant has kept the said gown vacant since from two years and further the complainant has given letter to OP No.1 on 23.12.2014 requesting to disconnect the electricity in his godown.  Further, the complainant has paid Rs.60/- as minimum charges to the OP No.1.  After that, the complainant has obtained statement from the OPs by that time, he came to know that, the OPs have fixed 161 units per month to his godown.  According to the complainant, without using the electricity, the OPs have fixed 161 units and further the OPs have issued the bill to the complainant to pay Rs.13,612/- along with interest at the rate of 1% per mensm.  But, the OPs have taken a contention in their version admitting that, the complainant has obtained the electricity connection to his godown.  As per the documents produced by the complainant, it clearly goes to show that, the complainant has given letter to the OP No.1 on 23.12.2014 reqesting to disconnect the electricity connection to his godown but, the OPs have not disconnected the same.  The OPs have fixed the electricity charges to the godown of the complainant at 161 units per month.  But as per the documents it clearly shows that, the complainant has not used the godown and they have not obtained the electricity connection after giving letter to the OPs.  In this case, the OP No.1 has committed deficiency in service because, the complainant has given letter to the OP No.1 requesting to disconnect the electricity connection to his godown but, the OPs have not disconnected the same.  The OPs have fixed the electricity consumption charges at 161 units per mensm.  According to the OPs, the complainant has used 493 units for three months and he has to pay Rs.13,612/- with interest at the rate of 1% per mensm, which is not correct because, when the complainant has issued letter to the OP No.1 to disconnect the electricity connection, the duty of the OPs is to disconnect the same.  But, the same is not done by the OPs, which is a deficiency in service. 

9.   We have gone through the entire documents filed by the complainant.  As per Ex.A-1, the complainant has given letter dated 24.12.2014 to the OP No.1 requesting to disconnect the electric connection obtained for his godown.  But, the OPs have not come forward to disconnect the electricity connection.  Further as per Ex.A-5, the OPs have received Rs.60/- p.m from the complainant as minimum charges towards meter charges.  Such being the case, the question of fixing 161 units per mensm does not arise.  Therefore, the OPs have committed deficiency in their service in fixing the charges of Rs.13,612/-.   Therefore, we come to the conclusion that, there is a deficiency of service on the part of OPs Accordingly, the complaint filed by the complainant is liable to be allowed and  Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.    

  10.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

 

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is hereby partly allowed.

It is ordered that the OPs are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards compensation to the complainant for unnecessary fixing the MNR charges to the go-down of the complainant along with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization.

It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the proceedings to the complainant. 

It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

 (This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 19/05/2018 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)         

 

 

                                     

 MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

 

PW-1:  Complainant by way of affidavit evidence.

 

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs:

 

DW-1: Smt.Nagarathna, AEE of OP No.1 by way of affidavit evidence.

 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Letter dated 23.12.2014 by the complainant to OP No.1
02	Ex-A-2:-	Letter dated 24.12.2014 by the complainant to OP No.1
03	Ex-A-3:-	Letter dated 06.08.2016 by the complainant to OP No.1
04	Ex.A-4:	Statement showing the consumer transaction for the period from 22.06.2013 to 22.12.2015
05	Ex.A-5:-	Receipt dated 07.12.2015
06	Ex.A-6:-	Legal notice dated 01.09.2016
07	Ex.A-7:-	3 Postal receipts
08	Ex.A-8:-	3 Postal acknowledgements

 

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

-Nil-

 

MEMBER                                                            PRESIDENT

Rhr**