Orissa

Cuttak

CC/195/2021

Ullash Kumar Nayak - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Executive Engineer,TP Central Odisha Distribution Limited. - Opp.Party(s)

A K Samal

04 Nov 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                                    C.C.No.195/2021

 

Ullash Kumar Nayak,

S/O:Late Sarbeswar Nayak,

Res. of At:Ambika Lane,Khannagar,

Badambadi,Town/Dist:Cuttack.                                              ... Complainant.

 

                                                Vrs.

1.       The Executive Engineer,TP Central

                   Odisha Distribution Limited(TPCODL),

                     City Distribution Division No.II,Badambadi,

                    Town/Dist:Cuttack.

 

2.        The Deputy Manager,Commerce,

      TP Central Odisha Distributiion Limited(PCODL),

                   City Distribution Division No.II,Badambadi,

     Town/Dist:Cuttack.                                                                 ... Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:               Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:     18.11.2021

Date of Order:   04.11.2022

 

For the complainant:          Mr. A.K.Samal,Advocate.

For the O.Ps  :                      Mr. A.K.Dash,Advocate.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President.                                         

            Case of the complainant bereft unnecessary details as made out from the complaint petition in short is that he has electricity connection to his house vide Consumer I.D No.302502136230 and Consumer Account no.02136230.  The said account stands in the name of the deceased father of the complainant.  The complainant was regularly paying the energy dues.  On 1.9.21 during noon some strangers identifying themselves to be the staffs of the O.Ps had demanded arbitrarily a sum of Rs.20,613.28p after going to his house in his absence for checking the electricity meter.  They had threatened to the inmates of the complainant to disconnect the electricity line if the said amount is not paid.  The efforts of the complainant to resolve that issue had not materialised and lateron the O.Ps had issued disconnection notice to him for which the complainant had approached this Commission seeking withdrawal of such illegal demand of Rs. Rs.20,613.28p for the bills of October & November,2021 as made by the O.Ps.  He had requested to direct the O.P to pay him compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- towards his mental agony and harassment and also to pay cost and any other reliefs as deemed fit and proper.

            The complainant has filed copies of several documents in order to prove his case.

2.         On the other hand, the O.Ps have contested this case and have filed their written version jointly.  According to the O.Ps, the complainant had suppressed material facts and his complaint petition is liable to be dismissed being not maintainable.  According to the O.Ps, the Enforcement Wing had gone to the house of the complainant on 1.9.21 for verification of the electrical meter there and had noticed that the electrical meter was in a tilted position and thereby the complainant was abstracting electrical energy illegally by suppressing the meter reading.  It is because, the meter installed in the house of the complainant then was of “SUZHOU” make and this typed of meter will not record the consumption of energy if fitted in a tilted position.  It is for this a provisional bill amounting to Rs.23,565/- on that day was served upon the inmates of the complainant.  The Assessing Officer after final assessment dt.29.9.21 had instructed the complainant to pay a sum of Rs.23,5465/- towards the consumption of electrical energy.   Lateron, when the complainant failed to make payment, disconnection notice was served upon him.  As such, the O.Ps have prayed through their written version that there was no deficiency on their part and thus, the petition as filed by the complainant is liable to be dismissed.

 The  O.Ps have filed copies of certain documents in order to prove their case.

3.         Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of the written version, this Commission is of a view to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a proper conclusion.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable ?

            ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps ?

            iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed ?

            The complainant has filed his evidence affidavit which when perused, it is noticed that he has reiterated the averments as made by him in the complaint petition.  On the other hand, the O.Ps have examined one Hemanta Kumar Routray,(Deputy Manager(Commerce),Electrical Sub-Division No.II,Badambadi,Cuttack and have filed his evidence affidavit also.  The said evidence affidavit on behalf of the O.Ps when perused, it is noticed that the same is a reiteration of the averments as made by the O.Ps in their written version.

Issue no.ii.

            Out of the three issues as framed here in this case, issue no.ii being the pertinent one taken up first to be considered.

            Admittedly, the complainant is a consumer of the electricity.  His deceased father Sarbeswar Nayak had obtained an electricity connection to his house bearing Consumer I.D No.302502136230 and Consumer Account no.02136230.  After death of his father, the complainant became the consumer of O.Ps and according to him, he was paying the bills regularly.  It is the contention of the O.Ps that their Enforcement Wing when made physical verification of the electricity meter in the house of the complainant, they found it to be affixed in a tilted position.  According to the copy of the report of the O.Ps as affixed to their written version, when perused, it goes to show that the inspection team had noticed the meter box in a tilted position at the house of the complainant.  The meter was not showing any reading of the disc in the meter was not revolving.  The inspection team have opined in the said report that the consumer was abstracting electrical energy dishonestly.  In this context, the complainant has mentioned in his complaint petition that the meter was OK and due to fear of disconnection his wife had signed the documents of the O.Ps without knowing or understanding the contents therein as she was not well versed with English language.  When the copy of the report as filed by the O.Ps alongwith their written version, is perused, it is noticed that the said report contains the signature of one N. Nayak at the right hand bottom where signature of consumer is to be given.  The said signature appears to be in English.  The complainant was served with the provisional assessment bill and also the disconnection notice as issued to him by the O.Ps.  The complainant alleges that the assessment made by the Investigation Wing of the O.Ps is quite arbitrary and illegal.  According to him, his electricity meter was not affixed in a tilted position and was rather OK and he was paying all the energy dues regularly.  If this be so, it is not understood as to what made the O.Ps inspect the electrical meter of the complainant at his house and provide a report of illegal abstraction of electrical energy by the complainant after noticing about the affixing the meter box in a tilted position.  There is no animosity made out by the complainant in between himself and the O.Ps.  In absence of such grudge or rivalry, the contention of the complainant that his electrical meter box was OK and was not fitted in a tilted condition does not hold good.  Thus, when the O.Ps, after local inspection through their Investigation Wing could notice that the electrical meter box in the house of the complainant was affixed in a tilted position thereby there was no running of the electrical meter and that the disc in the meter box was not revolving; convinces us to believe the versions of the O.Ps and to disbelieve the plea of the complainant.  Thus, when the complainant had adopted unfair means to consume electrical energy and the same was noticed by the Investigation Wing of the O.Ps, the levy of the assessment as made by the O.Ps appears to be justified and there is no deficiency noticed on the part of the O.Ps here in this case.  This issue is accordingly answered in favour of the O.Ps.

Issues no.i & iii.

            From the discussions as made above, it is concluded that the complaint as filed by the complainant is not maintainable and he is not entitled to any of the reliefs as claimed by him.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                                            ORDER

            The case is dismissed on contest against O.Ps and as regards to the facts and circumstances of the case without any cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 4^th day of November,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.           

                                                                                                                                Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President

                                                                                                                                                         Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                                     Member