DATE OF DISPOSAL: 17.08.2023

PER:   SRI SATISH KUMAR PANIGRAHI, PRESIDENT: 

   The fact of the case in brief is that the  complainant has filed this consumer complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Parties  (in short the O.Ps ) and for redressal of his grievance before this Commission.  

2. The electricity connection is provided to the premises of the Complainant situated at village: Kukudakhandi under B.Sadar Police station within the revenue jurisdiction of Ganjam District. The house of the complainant was provided with electricity by the erstwhile OSEB vide Con. No.:D3-C-38 stands in the name of Parsu Dalabehera (since deceased) who was Grand Father of the present Complainant. The name of the consumer Parsu Dalabehera (since deceased) is not changed in the records of the O.Ps although he passed away several years ago. Now the complainant has become a bonafide occupant of the house premises to which electricity has been supplied in reference to the New Account No. 343201480008. There was a criminal proceeding against the present complainant bearing F.I.R on dated 13.02.2004 at the Sadar police station, Berhampur vide P.S. Case No. 19/2004 U/S 341/323/294/332/186/506 IPC corresponding to G.R.No. 136/2004 on the file of S.D.J.M. Berhampur, Dist: Ganjam for the cause of cut-off the electricity of the premises which was initiated by the Ops but in the said case the complainant got acquitted in the year 2013. The complainant prefers to substantiate the specific cause of action of the said case that “the power supply was disconnected on dated 13.02.2004 at 2.20P.M. for non-payment of electric dues and thereafter the complainant was not provided with power supply by the O.Ps and stopped assessing the energy consumption in respect of the case house. Thereafter the present complainant advanced a petition U/S 22-C(1) of the L.S.A Act, 1987 before the permanent Lok Adalat (PUS), Ganjam, Berhampur in PLA Case No. 112/2015 finally disposed of thereafter on 11.07.2015 in favour of the complainant before the National Lok Adalat in absence of the complainant. Later the O.P.No.2 in his letter No.318(5) dated 12.08.2015 with illegal demand of alleged outstanding dues to be paid in stipulated time. The complainant issued a notice on 01.09.2015 through his counsel alleging that the said disconnection notice as illegal, compelling the complainant for payment of dues against their erroneous billing ought not to be paid by the complainant.  However a sum of Rs.20,000/- was paid under compulsion by Dr. Siba Sundar Dalabehera, son of the complainant for restoration of power supply and in pursuance of letter No. 408(3) dated 01.10.2015 the O.P.No.2 electricity was restored. At this juncture the complainant put forth that the arbitrary and deliberates disconnection of power supply to the house premises of the complainant was without any bonafide reason and alternative enforcement of demand of payment in lieu of correct billing is completely illegal. Now, the O.Ps continue their demand for payment of disputed outstanding dues and the complainant can hardly comply the same agreeing thereby for revision of the bill of electricity duty.  On the other, the Ops are very much callous on said issue, rather pressuring hard for payment of electricity charges without proper assessment putting there to disconnect the electric connection in the event of non-payment, which is contrary to law. The O.Ps have again disconnected the power supply to the house of the complainant on 07.12.2015. The intentional and whimsical cut off power to the complainant’s house by the O.Ps having no legitimate cause amounts to deficiency in their service. The O.Ps have already made the complainant to run from pillar to post only to perpetrate their vindictive attitude/ill-motivated interest resulting gross harassment and mental agony to the complainant and his family specifically to the bed-ridden chronic patient- the wife of the complainant for which the O.P. jointly and severally liable for payment of compensation amounting Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps the complainant prayed to direct the O.Ps for supply of correct bill to the complainant for onward payment to meet the ends of justice.

3. The O.Ps filed written version stated that the present proceeding is not maintainable in law though the complainant has tried his best to create a fresh cause of action with reference to the order passed by the Hon’ble Permanent Lok Adalat Berhampur in P.L.A. case No. 112/2015. The G.R. case and the orders passed thereon as referred in the complaint petition is no way relevant for adjudication of the disputes between the parties and these allegations are made just to attract the sympathy of the Hon’ble Forum. The allegations made in para-6 of the complaint petition are nothing but suppression of the order passed by the Hon’ble P.L.A. Berhampur and the action taken by the Supply Engineer for implementation of the order of the P.L.A. It is falsely alleged by the complainant that the O.Ps did not act upon the norms as fixed and concluded by the order, but the O.Ps have complied the order and revised the bill on the basis of the consumption and by following the Regulation revised the bill and the revised bill in question is duly acknowledged by the consumer and after receipt of the revised bill the beneficiary of the electricity against the consumer number has approached the supply Engineer with a request to allow him to make payment of the revised bill amount on installment basis i.e. payment of outstanding dues of Rs.74,125/- up to 08/2015.  The Supply Engineer in order to close the dispute was pleased to allow the payment of dues on installment basis i.e. under four installments commencing from the month of 30.11.2015. Accordingly the consumer has also paid the firsts installment with R.C./D.C. charges on 30.09.2015 for an amount of Rs.20,000/- and Rs.18,850/- along with R.C/D.C. charges of Rs.150/- on 10.12.2015. In view of the revision of the bill followed with the order of the Hon’ble P.L.A. the bill is revised and the same is accepted by the consumer and thereafter application has been received by the authority for allowing the installment and as agreed by the consumer and the supply Engineer the payment are made without any protest. So the present complainant has no right to question about the illegality or erroneous bill before any court of law or before this Forum.  At the time of filing of the application the consumer has suppressed these facts, otherwise if such facts are brought to the knowledge of the Forum, the present complaint would not be admitted. This Forum is aware that an order has been passed by the Hon’ble P.L.A. on the basis of the settlement between the parties; it amounts to a decree within the meaning of C.P.C. and under the legal Services Act that cannot be challenged before any court of law including this consumer. However, if at all such an order is not carried out by any of the parties it is open to the aggrieved parties to file Execution Proceeding before the Hon’ble Civil Court having jurisdiction to entertain the same, but not challenging the same under the Consumer Protection Act. The present application is filed and admission made by this Hon’ble Forum amounts to create the multiplicity of litigation of between the parties and this Hon’ble Forum has no jurisdiction neither to execute nor to questioned about the order/judgment passed by the Hon’ble P.L.A. in a case of settlement arrived on consent of the parties as provided under Section -21 of the Legal Services Act. The proceeding before the Forum is also not maintainable in law as per the provisions laid under section- 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Though the Interim order is passed without jurisdiction and natural justice as well as clear violation of the law as the O.Ps has not intimated the advancing of the case which was posted to 23.02.2016 for filing counter to the application, the Interim Application was finally disposed of in advance on 04.02.2016.  The O.Ps being civilized and law abiding officers of the organization honor the order with a hope to recalling the order on the basis of the counter as consumer has suppressed the material facts by trying his bests to manage such as order in his favour behind the back of the O.Ps. The consumer is bound to pay the revised bill amount without any fail unless otherwise the order passed by the Hon’ble P.L.A is set aside by the Higher Forum, but not by virtue of this Interim order passed by this Hon’ble Forum. This Hon’ble Forum has no jurisdiction to encroach upon the powers and functions of the other statutory authority i.e. P.L.A constituted under the Central Act, because the Consumer Forum is not an Appellate Authority against the order of the P.L.A. The complainant is liable to pay the rest amount of the revised bill amount as agreed thereon in order to avoid disconnection of power supply. Hence the O.Ps prayed to direct the complainant to deposit the revised bill amount and current bill amount in order to avoid disconnection of power supply, in the interest of justice.

4. On the date of hearing both parties are found absent. We perused the complaint petition, written version and documents available in the case record. The complainant has remain absent in the Commission on the date of postings consistently and not taken any steps since October, 2018.

5. For just and proper adjudication in the present case, we thoroughly perused the case record reveals that the complainant voluntarily and his free will has given his implicit consent in writing to OP no.2 regarding the settlement of the disputes by depositing the outstanding amount in installment. It also reveals that the complainant has filed this case before the Consumer Commission after depositing the amount in installments as per the settlement made between themselves by the revision bill issued by the Ops in compliance with the Award passed by the Ld. Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services, Ganjam at Berhampur in PLA 112/2015 on 11.07.2015. Further, it reveals that the complainant had a prayer in the instant case that, direct the ops to issue correct bills. But the said prayer is not sustainable in law because the complainant had a claim on the same fact, which has already been decided in PLA 112/2015, Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services, Ganjam at Berhampur.

The relief that was being asked by the complainant in the present case would not stand since it was already well settled in law by way of Judgment by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Bharvagi Constructions v. Kothakapu Muthyam Reddy, 2017 (5) CTC 755.

Further the Lok Adalat award cannot be reversed or set-aside as ruled by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in K. Srinivasppa & Ors. v. M.mallamma & Ors., reported in 2022 (6) TMI 373, Supreme Court.

We considering the factual position of the case, the complainant’s                    case is dismissed against the O.Ps and the complainant is at liberty to file his complaint before Competent Court and he may avail the benefits under Section 14 of the Limitation Act 1963 in the best interest of justice. 

The interim order is pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order.

This case is disposed of accordingly.

The Judgment be uploaded on the www.confonet.nic.in for the perusal of the parties.

A certified copy of this Judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. A copy of this order be also sent to the Secretary, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Odisha, Cuttack for information.

The file is to be consigned to the record room along with a copy of this Judgment.

Pronounced on 17.08.2023