Orissa

Cuttak

CC/183/2021

Kabita Das - Complainant(s)

Versus

TPCODL - Opp.Party(s)

A K Das & associates

09 Nov 2022

ORDER

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

C.C.No.183/2021

Kabita Das,

D/O:Late Rabin Chandra Das,

Presently residing at:

Peyton Sahi,Seminary School Road,

P.O:Buxi Bazar,P.S:Puri Ghat,Dist:Cuttack.                          ... Complainant.

 

                                                Vrs.

1.        Executive Engineer(AGM),TPCODL,

CDD-1,Ranihat,Cuttack.

 

2.        Junior Engineer cum Manager,

TPCODL,Tinikonia Bagicha,

Cuttack.

 

3.       S.D.O(Electrical) Division,      TPCODL,

                             Cuttack.                                                                                     ... Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:               Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:     01.12.2021

Date of Order:   09.11.2022

 

For the complainant:          Mr. A.K.Das,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps               :         Mr. A.K.Nath,Adv. & Associates.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President.             

            Case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition bereft unnecessary details in short is that though she had a stay order in her favour in the matter sub-judice before this Commission bearing no.130/2018, the O.Ps had disconnected power supply on 21.9.2021 as provided to her and had asked her to pay the disputed bill despite the order of the Hon’ble Commission.  Thereafter though they had resumed the power supply to the house of the complainant, they are asking the complainant for payment of the said disputed amount as early as possible and to withdraw the case or else they would again disconnect the power supply.  The O.Ps after restoring the power supply to the residence of the complainant have not generating any monthly energy bill.  The O.Ps had ultimately generated a bill amounting to Rs.82,624/- without any basis and had asked the complainant to pay the same or else her line would be disconnected.  On 30.10.21, the O.Ps had again disconnected the power supply of the complainant and the complainant had to pay a sum of Rs.11,670/- alongwith reconnection charge of Rs.150/-.  After restoring the power supply to the complainant, again the O.Ps are forcing her to pay the defaulted bill amount of Rs.70,945/- or else they would disconnect the power supply to the residence of the complainant again.  The O.Ps have levied delay payment surcharge of Rs.989/- illegally.  It is for this, the complainant has filed this case seeking reassessment of the unjustified amount of Rs.82,624/- by the O.Ps and to remove the DPS(delay payment surcharge)  therefrom and also to restrict the O.Ps  from further disconnecting her power supply.

            In order to prove her case, she has filed copies of several documents alongwith her complaint petition.

2.         The O.Ps have contested this case and have filed their joint written version but O.P no.1 has also filed a separate written version.  On perusal of the written version of O.P no.1, it is noticed that he has mentioned therein that the complaint petition is not maintainable which is liable to be dismissed since because the complainant has no loco-standi and had rather suppressed material facts.  According to O.P no.1, the case is bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties.  According to him, the complainant is the daughter of late Rabin Das of Peyton Sahi,Buxibazar,Cuttack who is legal heir of late Umesh Chandra Das.  The said Umesh Chandra Das had four sons namely Nabin,Bijan,Bipin and Rabin.  Rabin has two sons namely Sanjiv and Rajiv and also one daughter namely Kabita, the complainant of this case.   Monalisa, the wife of Rajiv had applied for a new connection.  One Mrs. Sujata Das having consumer no.00741248 who is wife of one of the brothers, has arrear outstanding of Rs.3,62,434/-.  As per order dt.7.10.21 out of total sum of Rs.4,51,187/- as on 30.9.21 considering the disputed amount of Rs.3,68,323/-, the balance amount of Rs.82,864/- has been directed to be deposited on instalment but the same is yet to be deposited.  For the same plot, Monalisa Das has filed a writ petition bearing WPC no.2133/2018 before the Hon’ble High Court of Odisha,Cuttack but has subsequently filed a petition to withdraw the same case.  Thus, according to O.P no.1, the outstanding amount of Rs.82,624/- is yet to be paid by the complainant who is a habitual defaulter alongwith her inmates.  Thus, O.P no.1 has prayed to dismiss the case with heavy cost.

            Through the joint written version, the O.Ps have also stated that the complaint petition is barred by limitation, the complainant had suppressed material facts, misleaded the court and has filed this case with ulterior motive which is liable to be rejected with cost.

3.         Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of both the written versions as available in this case, 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 the case is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties?     

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

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

 

 

Issue no.ii.

            Out of the four issues, issue no.iii being the pertinent issue is taken up first to be considered here in this case.

            In order to make out deficiency, it is to be noticed that if without any valid reason, the O.Ps had disconnected the power supply of the complainant time and again and if they were threatening the complainant to pay any hypothetical amount which is erroneous and unethical.  While pondering into the evidence as available from either side in this case, it is noticed that for the same plot the complainant had filed another case vide C.C. no.130 of 2018 which has been disposed of vide order dt.24.5.2022 and the said case was dismissed on contest which had gone against the present complainant Kabita Das.  As it appears from the written version of O.P no.1 in another case filed by one Sujata Das bearing consumer no.00741248 there is outstanding arrear of Rs.3,62,434/- and as per order dt.7.10.21 out of outstanding arrear amount of Rs.4,51,187/- as on 30.9.21, after setting aside disputed amounts of Rs.3,68,323/-, the balance amount of Rs.82,864/- was required to be paid by the complainant but it is yet to be paid.  For the same plot another Monalisa Das had preferred Writ Petition bearing no.21331 of 2018 before the Hon’ble High Court of Odisha.  Thus, as it appears that the complainant and her inmates are always interested in litigating with the O.Ps without clearing the bonafide arrear dues towards the consumption of electrical energy by them.  Accordingly, here in this case it can never be said that there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  This issue thus goes in favour of the O.Ps.

 

 

Issues no.i,ii & iv.

            From the discussions as made above, it is concluded that the complaint case as filed by the complainant is not maintainable and the complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs as claimed by her.

ORDER

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

Order pronounced in the open court on the 9^th day of   November,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.           

                                                                                                                                Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President

                       

                                                                                                                                                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                                               Member