IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,PURI

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 147/2018

Present : Sri D. N. Moharana, President I/c

Miss S.K. Rath, Member(W)

Laxmidhar Swain S/o. Late Alekha Swain

At-Dhabaleswar Nagar, Damodar Road, PS-Baliapanda

Po/Dist. Puri ...Complainant

Vrs.

1- The Executive Manager, (CESU),

P.E.D,Puri.Red Cross Road,PS- Kumbharpada,Puri.

2-The Divisional Manager,FEDCO,

At-Behind Gundicha Temple, PO/Dist-Puri

3-The Junior Engineer(Electrical),FEDCO,

Baliapanda Electrical Section, Baliapanda,PO,/Dist-Puri ...Opp.Parties

For the complainant- Sri J.K.Rath, Advocate

For the Opp. Parties- None

DATE OF FILING- 20. 11. 20187

DATE OF DISPOSAL- 20. 03. 2020

O R D E R

Sri D,. Moharana, President Incharge.

The case of the complainant in short is that the complainant is a consumer of electricity bearing Consumer No.120490011596 to his house premises under domestic category at Baliapanda having 1.00 K.W load. He was paying the consumption charges on actual basis as the status of the meter was O.K . The electricity bill was supplied in the name of Sidheswar Baral. It is alleged that on 19.11.2018, some persons of FEDCO forcibly entered inside his premises in his absence without any prior permission or consent , broken the seal of the meter and damaged the tested meter . They prepared physical verification report and supplied it to one Rani Barik, the neighbor to his house, wherein it has been reflected that the meter is tampered. The physical verification report made in the name of Laxmidhar Swain whereas the electric line stands in the name of Sidheswar Baral. Despite his several personal approaches to do the needful, the O.Ps did not consider it and threatened to disconnect the power supply. Hence, this case.

2- The Opposite Parties appeared through their learned counsels but despite several adjournments taken, they did not feel it proper and obligatory to file written version to contest the case. Hence, the O.Ps were set ex-parte vide order dated 13.11.2018.

3- On the date of hearing, the learned counsel for the complainant is present and submitted his case together with relevant documents pertaining to the case matter. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the complainant and perused the documents as filed on record. On perusal of the case record, we find that by an order dated 22.11.2018, the O.Ps were restrained to disconnect the power supply to the premises of the complainant and nothing on record regarding disconnection of the power supply till date. Moreover, while verifying the bill of 15.11.2018, it is clear that the electricity line stands in the name of Sidheswar Baral and as on 15.11.2018, it reveals that the bill supplies on actual basis which clarifies that the status of meter was O.K as on 15.11.2018. However, on 19.11.2018 the staff of FEDCO forcibly entered into the premises of the complainant and prepared a physical verification report in absence of the complainant stating therein that the meter was tampered meter endorsing therein that a square hole was created in the back side of the meter body and declared the meter as tampered. The complainant alleges that the meter was broken in his absence and no family member was present when they broken the seal of the meter, therefore, he suspected malpractice and unfair trade practice adopted by the staff of O.Ps to harass him and extract money. We also carefully gone through the copy of the physical verification report dt. 19.11.2018 filed by the complainant wherein it is seen that the PVEI report supplied in the name of Laxmidhara Swain whereas the electric connection as per bill dated 15.11.2019 stands in the name of Sidheswar Baral having Consumer No.120490011596. If the O.Ps would have appeared and clarified the allegations pointed out in the PVEI report dt. 19.11.2018 regarding name of the consumer, then it would have been judiciously justified to reach at the conclusion as to the correctness of the PVEI report supplied to a person other than a consumer . But despite several opportunities given to O.Ps to file written version and place their case, the O.Ps did not feel it proper to contest the case. Hence, in view of the above facts, we conclude that the PVEI is prepared on the same consumer number but in the wrong name. However, we have no jurisdiction to decide the same as alleged in the report as to tampering of meter. No evidence is adduced by the complainant to prove its case that the meter has been broken while conducting the verification of electrical installations but the contents of the grounds of the complainant is supported by an affidavit. On the other hand, the O.P also remained aloof from the case. At this stage, therefore, considering breaking of meter, the O.Ps are jointly and severally liable to install a new meter in the premises of the complainant free of cost. The cost of the meter shall be borne by the person concerned who are actually liable for breaking of meter. Hence , it is ordered that:

ORDER

The case of the complainant is allowed ex- parte against the O.Ps. The Opposite Parties are directed to install a new meter free of cost in the premises of the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and raise bill as per actual meter reading basis thereafter. The cost of the meter shall be borne by the person concerned who are actually liable for breaking of meter and the cost of the meter shall be realized by the O.Ps in due process of law. In view of the peculiar circumstances of the case, no compensation or cost is awarded as prayed by the complainant.

Dictated and corrected by me on this day of March, 2020.

Sd/-S.K.Rath Sd/-D. Mohapatra

I AGREE(MEMBER) PRESIDENT I/C