Orissa

Ganjam

CC/18/2022

Smt. Tamala Dakua, 63 yrs - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Sub-Divisional Officer(SDO), TPSODL - Opp.Party(s)

Sri Kailash Chanda Mishra

20 May 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, GANJAM, BERHAMPUR.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/18/2022
( Date of Filing : 11 Feb 2022 )
 
1. Smt. Tamala Dakua, 63 yrs
W/o Sri Indramani Dakua, Shanti Nagar 2nd Lane, Near Haridakhandi Road, Po - Panigrahipentho, Ps- Bada Bazar, Berhampur - 6, Ganjam.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Sub-Divisional Officer(SDO), TPSODL
Sub-Divisional No - 1, Corporation Road, Berhampur, Ganjam.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Satish Kumar Panigrahi PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Saritri Pattanaik MEMBER
 
PRESENT:For the Complainant: Adv. Sri Krushna Chandra Sahu, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 For the Opposite Party: Adv. Sri Mahendra Kumar Mohapatra, Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 20 May 2024
Final Order / Judgement

 

                                                DATE OF DISPOSAL: 20.05.2024

 

 

PER:  SRI SATISH KUMAR PANIGRAHI, PRESIDENT

 

            The fact of the case in brief is that the complainant has filed this Consumer complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Parties  (in short O.Ps.) for redressal of his grievance before this Commission.

            2. The complainant is the consumer in Account No.342102172489 issued by the O.P. The O.P. use to issue the monthly energy charges and the complainant deposit the bill amount accordingly. Usually the monthly energy meter reading goes to 150 units.  During the month of March 2021 the unit consumes was 153 units and energy charges of net amount Rs.647.00. While communicating the energy bill for the month of April 2021 the bill units started as 534 units and net amount of Rs.1961/-. The complainant requested and filed an application for change of meter on 17.06.2021 in the office of the O.P. to submit correct consumption of bill instead of the giving the bill according to choice and there was none to respond. The meter reading is fluctuated for which the complainant also requested to allow for change of meter connection, but there is no answer to the same from the O.P. The complainant was bound to deposit the bill amount of Rs.1961/-through not consumed the same the action of the O.P. forceful, arbitrary, unlawful. The consumption bill for the month of May 2021 of 117 units and net bill amount of Rs.530.86. The consumption bill for the month of October 2021 of 149 units and net bill amount of Rs.688.34.  The consumption bill for the month of November 2021 of 149 units and net bill amount of Rs.808.29. The consumption bill for the month of December 2021 of 130 units and net amount of Rs.714.94.  The complainant deposited the same amount with the O.P. through the complainant requested to check the meter concerned and revise the consumption bill of April 2021. The O.P. neither took any action not advised anything causing harassment to the consumer. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. the complainant prayed to direct the O.P. for inspection of the meter and change the meter immediately,  for revising the consumption the bill from April 2021 forthwith, compensation of Rs.10,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- in the best interest of justice.

            3. The O.P. filed written version through his advocate. It is stated that it is true to say that the complainant is a consumer of electricity of TPSODL having Consumer No. 342102172489. The bill for the month of February 2021 has been served on actual consumption of 153 units. The bill for the month of March 2021 was served to the complainant on provisional basis; as such the billing in the month of March 2021 has been made on 153 units as same to the previous billing month. In the billing month of April 2021 the actual meter reading was taken and after auto adjustment the bill for Rs.1961/- served on the complainant.  It is pertinent to mention here that the actual meter reading during Feb 2021 was 4651 unit and after provisional billing in the month of March 2021 the actual meter reading of 5185 units was taken during April 2021.  So, the actual consumption for 2 billing months i.e. March 2021 and April 2021 is 534 units (5185-4651) units and the monthly consumption comes to 267 units, which is usual for a domestic consumer during summer season. The allegation that the bill is served as per choice of the O.P. is wrong. The O.P. has been serving actual consumption bill every month to the complainant apart from some exceptional occasions in which provisional bills have been served due to house lock or others. From the billing pattern, it is clearly evident that provisional bills have been raised in the month of March 2021 and July 2021 and in the subsequent billing period the provisional bills have been regularized as per the provisions of OERC, Distribution (Condition of Supply) Code, 2019. The billing pattern is enclosed herewith as Annexure-1-.  In para-7 & 8 of the complaint it is humbly submitted that no such application dated 17.06.2021 is filed in the office of the O.P. for change of meter. The complainant has to produce strict proof of the same.  However, the previous meter has already been replaced by a new meter during March 2022 as the previous meter was defective since the billing month October 2021.  In para-9 of the petition is totally false and hereby denied. The complainant has not deposited Rs.1961/- with the O.P. and he is required to submit the payment proof in this regard. The complainant has made last deposit on 26.04.2021 vide receipt number 34200148 and thereafter the complainant has not made any payment and becomes a regular defaulter in payment of electricity bill, as a result the arrear electricity becomes Rs.21,028/- as on the billing month November 2022. The payment details of the complainant are enclosed herewith as Annexure-II-. It is false to say that’s the complainant is suffered mental agonies, rather the complainant has enjoyed the electricity without making any payment since April 2021 for which the O.P. is suffering loss of revenue. For revision of the defective bill the complainant has to comply the provision of Reg. 149 of the OERC Distribution (Conditions of Supply) Code, 2019.  The complainant has neither complied the provisions of Reg. 149 as mentioned above nor deposited any electricity dues, even the undisputed bill after replacement of the new meter till date. So the allegation of the complainant is baseless. The complainant has to pay the electricity bill complying the provision of Reg. 149 of the OERC Code, 2019 pending settlement of her bill, and the bill of the complainant will be revised as per Reg. 155 of the OERC code for the period the previous meter remains defective and the revised bill will be served on the complainant. Hence the O.P. prayed to dismiss the case in the interests of justice.

            4. On the date of hearing advocate for both the parties are present. We heard argument from both parties at length. We perused the complaint petition, written version and documents available in the case record.

            On perusal of the evidences adduced by both parties, it comes to light that, the present consumer is coming under spot billing category. The op has issued provisional bill many times for more than two meter reading cycle at a stretch in violating the Reg. 151(viii) of OERC Distribution (Conditions of Supply) code, 2019. Further it is also manifest from the Annexure – I filed by the OP that, since Nov. 2019 the opposite party has supplied bills for more than 30 days (±3 days) billed days in every month to the complainant/consumer which is in violation of Chapter-X of the OERC Distribution (Conditions of Supply) Code, 2019. In view of the Annexure – I, the opposite party has collected excess amount from the complainant/consumer by suppressing material fact and submitted that it was happened due to provisional billing recorded from Feb. 2021 to April 2021 and accordingly to adjust the provisional bill there was more amount charged in the April 2021 billing as per unit imposed. The very act of the Opposite party smells foul and deficient in accordance to the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and OERC (Standards of Performance) Regulations, 2004. Hence the service of the opposite party in the instant case is sub-standard and violated the Reg. 149/150(i) of the Code, 2019 as not revised the bill since then.

            In view of the above context, the Commission allowed the complaint against the opposite party who is liable to refund the such excess amount together with interest @ 1% p.m from the date of payment of excess amount since November 2019 together with litigation and compensation amount of Rs.5000/- to the complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of the order failing which the complainant shall recover the entire order amount which shall carry interest @12% pa from the date of filling of the case i.e., Dated:11.02.2022 till actual payment is made by the OP in accordance to Sec.71/72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

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, 2019.

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

 

 

 

Pronounced on 20.05.2024

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Satish Kumar Panigrahi]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Saritri Pattanaik]
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.