BEFORE THE  DIST. CONSUMERS DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM;  DHARWAD.

DATE: 31^st August 2015       

PRESENT:

1) Shri B.H.Shreeharsha       : President

2) Smt.M.Vijayalaxmi             : Member 

Complaint No.: 198/2015  

Complainant/s:       Linnet D’silva, Sriramanagar, Attikolla, Dharwad

(In person)

v/s

Respondent/s:         The Assistant Executive Engineer (Ele) CSD-1, HESCOM, Dharwad.

                                (By Sri.K.B.Navalagimath, Adv.)

O R D E R

By: Shri. B.H.Shreeharsha : President.

1.     The complainant has filed this complaint claiming for a direction to the respondents to issue proper electricity bill for actual consumption, to cancel the interest levied since October 2014, to standby the order 09.12.2014 & to pay cost of the proceedings and to grant such other reliefs.

Brief facts of the case are as under:

2.     The case of the complainant is that, complainant is an electricity connection holder bearing RR No.AEH 78214. In the year 2013 she got constructed a new house in the given address to the cause title. For that purpose she had obtained temporary power supply for construction purpose and she was given RR No.7944. Accordingly the complainant was regularly paying the bills as and when charged and sent by the respondent. In the month of November 2013 the complainant inaugurated new house on 15^th of 2013. On the same day at about 9.30 PM without prior notice the respondent disconnected the power connection causing huge inconvenience to the complainant. On 16.11.2013 the complainant personally went to respondent office and got restored the connection. On 18.11.2013 the respondent served a letter dt.17.10.2013 and the complainant received the same in person at respondent office. On 19.11.2013 the complainant raised objections to pay such a huge bill of Rs.7968/- and made request to reconsider & agreed to pay actual bill amount. Since November 2013 till 13.10.2014 the complainant had cleared all the upcoming bills in due time. On 06.11.2014 the respondent served a bill for Rs.7807/- with due date on 20.11.2014. For that the complainant submits objections on 08.11.2014. On 07.11.2014 the lineman attached to respondent without prior information disconnected the power supply. On the same day complainant personally went to the respondent office but no proper response. Thereafter the complainant sent e-mails to Managing Director, Executive Engineer and Asst. Exe. Engineer on 10.11.2014 requesting to restore power and the same was restored after 5 days power cut. Hence, the complainant put to inconvenience. In response to e-mail complaints of complainant to Managing Director, Executive Engineer and Asst. Exe. Engineer. On 10.11.2014 sent letter calling the complainant for meeting to discuss with regard to back billing charges levied between Account officer and other officers and complainant. After meeting it was resolved and back billing was withdrawn by the respondent and directed the complainant to pay balance of Rs.2656/- on 25.11.2014 the complainant paid Rs.2656/- as directed by the respondent. Once again the respondent on 06.12.2014 issued a new bill showing Rs.8820/-. When enquired no response was given. After enquiry the complainant agreed to pay Rs.772/- and paid the same on 13.02.2015. Though the complainant consumed the electricity of Rs.292/- as on 19.03.2015 the respondent served bill on 06.03.2015 with interest charging Rs.8405/-. Last bill was served on 06.04.2015 for Rs.8558/-. The act of the respondent caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant. On 11.11.2014 the respondent requested to return the letter sent by Addl. Accounts Officer on 22.11.2013 to the complainant saying that they have lost the copy they want Xerox of the same. With good faith complainant gave the letter but while returning the same the respondent meddled with their seal, scratched the same and issued the copy by putting new seal intentionally. Hence, aggrieved by the conduct of the respondent complainant filed the instant complaint praying for the relief as sought.

3.     In response to the notice issued from this Forum the respondent appeared and filed the written version in detail denying and disputing the complaint averments. Further the respondent taken contention that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts and prays for dismissal of the complaint. Also denied the inauguration of the house of the complainant and disconnection by the lineman on the same day by about 9.30 PM as alleged. The respondent denied further averments made by the complainant that after disconnection complainant approached the respondent and get restored the same by spending time and service of letter on 18.11.2013 of the letter dt.17.10.2013 in person to the complainant. While respondent admits issuance of electric bill by charging back billing and payments by the complainant. While respondent denies the approach of the respondent thereafter. Among such other admissions and denials the respondent asserts that the complainant unauthorisedly consumed more than the sanctioned loan accordingly vigilance squad visited, made observation in the presence of complainant herself & accordingly back billing was made for charges Rs.7968/- was served on the complainant. Thereafter the complainant raised objections. Thereafter Asst. E.E. heard the grievance of complainant and in the presence of Asst. Accounts Officer complainant was directed to pay Rs.2656/-. Accordingly the complainant paid the same on 25.11.2014, but on 10.07.2015 the Exe. Engineer (Ele) O&M Urban division Dharwad issued a letter to the respondent without orders of appellate authority back bill amount cannot be withdrawn. Under those circumstances the actual amount is reappearing in the subsequent bills as such the respondents have not committed any deficiency in service the action taken by the respondent is proper. The complainant did not filed any objections in time nor filed appeal before the proper authority. Even now it is open for the complainant to prefer appeal before appellate authority as per KERCES & D Code Regulation no.44 and prays for dismissal of the complaint.

4.     On the said pleadings the following points have arisen for consideration:

1. Whether complainant has proved that there was deficiency in service on the part of respondents ?
2. Whether complainant is entitled to the relief as claimed ?
3. To what relief the complainant is entitled ?

Both have filed sworn to affidavit relied on documents.  Heard. Perused the records.

Finding on points is as under.

1. Affirmative 
2. Accordingly  
3. As per order

Reasons

Points 1 and 2

5.     On going through the pleadings & evidence coupled with documents of both the parties it is evident that there is no dispute with regard to the fact,  the complainant is a consumer of the respondent.

6.     On going through the pleadings, evidence and documents the complainant herself admits she has used more power than the sanctioned power as she has obtained temporary connection for construction of a new house. Further it is also the case of the complainant that she was regular in paying the bills as and when it was due. Further grievance of the complainant that all of a sudden even though complainant was not in due she was served with bill 06.11.2014 Ex.C4 showing due Rs.7807/-. Immediately she filed objections as per Ex.C5 on 08.11.2014 with copies to M.D, EE, & AEE. Thereafter she was served with notice Ex.C9 dtd.11.11.2014 directing to pay the bill as per back bill Ex.C1.  When she approached respondent in accordance with the letter Ex.C9 the respondent by his order Ex.C10 dt.13.11.2014 directed the complainant to pay Rs.2656/-. Accordingly complainant remitted the same as per Ex.C15. After that she was getting normal billing for the power she is consuming but again she was served with Ex.C16 bill for Rs.8,820/-. Hence, she filed this complaint. Added to this, another grievance of the complainant is that the respondents on the date of inauguration of the house 15.11.2013 all of a sudden without notice the respondent disconnected and put the complainant in huge inconvenience. Once again on 07.11.2014 also the respondent has disconnected and made the complainant to stay in dark for 5 days though she was not kept any bill in due as such the respondents have committed deficiency in service and have played unfair trade practice.

7.     But the contention of the respondent is that they have back billed for having utilized more power than the sanctioned power and based on the vigilance report they have penalized and disconnected the power connection as such the respondents have not committed any deficiency in service. While the respondent admits the Ex.C9 notice and also the orders levying the penalty as per Ex.C10 but contended that since the Exe. Engineer issued letter Ex.R1 Dt.10.07.2015 to the respondent questioning the authority for waiving billing amount by withdrawing demand notice Ex.C1. Hence, respondent ought to have cancel the orders as passed in Ex.C10 and issued bill charging Rs.8820/- as per Ex.C16 as the respondent has no power to withdraw the demand interalia contended if any grievance to approach the appellate authority of respondent.

8.     By looking into the pleadings and evidence particularly the pleadings and evidence of the respondent it is evident that this is a suspected case of electricity theft. If it is a case of electricity theft this Forum has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter as per the findings 2014 (4) CPR 9 NC-Jodhpur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd. Vs. Mohit Computer & Electronics. Also as per 2014 (4) CPR 134 NC. In these cases it is held, the Forum has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter involved in electrical power theft.

9.     However by considering the action and response taken by the respondent after approach of the complainant, the respondent considered the plea of the complainant and allowed the prayer of the complainant as per Ex.C10 and received the amount as per Ex.C15. Thereafter as per Ex.R1 questioning the authority of power exercised by the Asst. Engineer the respondent once again issued bill demanding Rs.8,820/- as per Ex.16.  So also as per the grievance of the complainant the respondent even though the complainant complied and paid all the bills they have disconnected the power connection on twice without prior notice and subjected the complainant to harassment irrespective of power theft if any otherwise. To this extent there is a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the respondent.

10.   As per the observation made supra and also as per KERC EX & D code regulation no.44 the respondent has no authority and the complainant without approaching the proper authority i.e. appellate authority of electrical board filed the present complaint before this Forum without jurisdiction without impleading proper authority as respondents.

11.   Even otherwise the present respondent failed to contest the complaint properly by put forthing real facts and actual position of law, this Forum as a matter of law and facts at its own motion herewith direct the complainant to approach the proper authority and file appeal before the appellate authority of respondent and to seek relief of the prayer as prayed in the present complaint prayer column as this Forum has no jurisdiction to award or to order relief as prayed in the complaint prayer column. Hence, this Forum allowed only compensation and cost of the proceedings for the deficiency in service for repeated illegal disconnection without notice and towards cost of the proceedings as observation made.

12.  In view of the above discussions we have arrived and proceed to held issue.1 and 2 in affirmative and accordingly.

13.   Point.3: In view of the finding on points 1 and 2 proceeded to pass the following 

Order

        The complaint is partly allowed. The respondent is directed to pay Rs.2,000/- to the complainant as compensation for having put the complainant to inconvenience by illegal disconnections and to had passed the orders of withdrawing the back billing without authority and puts the complainant for trouble and Rs.500/- towards cost of the proceedings. However the complainant is directed to approach the appellate authority and to file her grievance and to seek relief immediately. The respondent shall pay the award amount within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Failing to comply the same, the said amount shall carry interest @9% P.A. from thereon till realization.

(Dictated to steno, transcribed by him and edited by us and pronounced in the open Forum on this day on 31^st day of August 2015)

(Smt.M.Vijayalaxmi)                                      (Sri.B.H.Shreeharsha)

Member                                                           President

Dist.Consumer Forum                                    Dist.Consumer Forum

MSR