Orissa

Kendujhar

CC/58/2022

Snehalata Das - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Chief Engineer - Opp.Party(s)

Sunil Kumar Pattanaik

18 Aug 2023

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
KENDUJHAR, ODISHA
 
Complaint Case No. CC/58/2022
( Date of Filing : 21 Sep 2022 )
 
1. Snehalata Das
W/O-late Prafulla Chandra Das At-Bhatta Sahi Po-Old Town, P.S-Town,
Keonjhar
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Chief Engineer
TPNODL,At-Januganj, Balasore At/Po-Dist-Balasore.
2. The Superintend Engineer TPNODL
At/Po/Dist- Keonjhar
Keonjhar
Odisha
3. The Executive Engineer
At/Po/Dist- Keonjhar
Keonjhar
Odisha
4. The S.D.O TPNODL
At/Po/Dist-Keonjhar
5. The Junior Engineer TPNODL
At/Po/Dist-Keonjhar
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Biranchi Narayan Patra PRESIDENT
  Jiban krushna Behera MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 18 Aug 2023
Final Order / Judgement

The brief  fact of the case is that the complainant is a consumer of O.Ps. vide Consumer No D9B10.  The complainant has filed one CC Case before this Commission vide C.C. No 12 of 2022 which has been rejected due to non-appearance and non production of necessary document. That she has been depositing one after another bill but the J.E. (Electrical) of W.N.3  intentionally refused to receive monthly bills and asking to deposit all outstanding bills with hanging bills of Rs.1,78,000/-. The complainant admits that the flying squad of TPNODL has visited her house and fined her for Rs.30,000/- for not having a meter in the house. That, electricity supply was disconnected and she was living in dark with her family though she has deposited Rs.58,000/- in different phases.  Aggrieved by this act of the OPs the complainant filed this petition before the Commission and prayed to direct the Ops to supply electricity to her house  and asked for compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-.  

 To substantiate his case the complaint relied upon the following documents:

1.Photocopy of 3 money receipts

Notice issued to the O.Ps. The Ops appeared through their counsel and submitted their version. Heard from both the parties.

In their written statement the Ops admitted that the complainant is a consumer under TPNODL. They stated that this petition is not maintainable before this Commissions as per provisions of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003. The OPs admitted that the petitioner is a consumer availing unauthorized load of 3 KW through a defective meter. The OPs submitted Spot Verification Report of dt.3.10.2015. Basing on the Spot Verification Report as per provision of Sec 126 of Indian Electricity Act, Provisional Assessment was made to assess the loss of electricity on dt.5.10.2015 and opportunity was given to file objection. But the petitioner has not filed objection. Hence the final assessment was made on dt.30.11.2015 for Rs.50,716/-. They also submitted that the bill from October 2015 to June 2020 was generated as load factor basis and after installation of meter actual bill was generated. They also submitted that the complainant is a defaulter and not paying electricity bills since March 2021.

The Ops have relied upon the following documents:

  1. SVR Copy
  2. Copy of Provisional Assessment
  3. Copy of Final Assessment
  4. Copy of Calculation Sheet

 Point for determination:

  1. Whether the Consumer complaint is maintainable?
  2. Whether O.P.s have  made any deficiency of service?
  3. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as sought for?

FINDINGS

Perused the case record.  It reveals that the during the inspection of the verification team the  complainant was using electricity without a meter. As per laid down procedure of I.E. Act the OPs have prepared Provisional as well as Final order of Assessment. There is a provision in the I.E. Act that if there is any dispute raised by the petitioner in a proceeding made by the Assessing Officer u/s 126  within 30 days of the said order the petitioner may prefer appeal before the Appellate Tribunal.

 

In  the matter of “Anish Ahammad vrs. U.P. Power Corporation of India” the Apex court has categorically stated that disputes  u/s126, Sec 135 to 141 of the Indian Electricity Act are beyond the purview of DCDRC”. Taking into consideration of all the above facts we hold to believe that the O.Ps. have not made any deficiency in service.  The complaint petition is not maintainable and the complainant is not entitled to get any compensation as sought for.

                                                           

ORDERS

The consumer complaint being devoid of merits is dismissed without any cost.

Pronounced the order in the open Commission on this   18thday of August  2023 under seal of the Commission.

 
 
[ Biranchi Narayan Patra]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ Jiban krushna Behera]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.