This is a complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying for direction upon O.P. to issue fresh bill for the period of Oct’2012 to Dec’ 2012 and from Jan’ 2013 to Mar’2013 for Rs.48,786/- as per actual unit consumption and to quash the disputed bills for the above mentioned period and  to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- for unnecessary harassment and mental agony and also for litigation cost of Rs.1,000/-.

 The case of the complainant in brief is that he has an electric connection vide consumer I.D. No.432029684. At the time of installation he deposited required documents and security deposits. Subsequently the meter was replaced with new Static Meter vide No.GS361638 since long. O.P issued electric bill quarterly as per actual consumption. He received bill from Jan’ 09 to March, 09 for Rs.886/-, April, 2009 to June 09 for Rs.1157./-. Thereafter, July, 2009 to Sept’09 for Rs.2816.00. So on.

 In April 2009 to June 2012 he received Rs.174.00 and July 2012 to Sept;2012 for Rs.3053.00.But in the month of Oct’12 to Dec’12 he received bill at an inflated rate at Rs.44742.00 and he sent objection letter dt.29.11.12 requesting for correction of the bill. But O.P issued another inflated bill for Jan’13 to March 2013 of Rs.48,786/- showing consumption 5518 unit. He sent objection letter dt. 25.04.13. Thereafter he received bill for the month of April, 2013 to June 2013 amounting to Rs.3457.00.

O.P paid electric bill up to Sept’2012 and subsequently for the period April, 2013 to Jan’14. Thereafter, O.P did not permit him to deposit the monthly bill until payment of outstanding dues. Petitioner then lodged complaint before Grievance Cell of O.P No.2 in 2014 and date of hearing fixed on 28.01.14. Due to illness he could not attend the hearing before the grievance cell. Suddenly on 21.12.13 the Grievance Cell issued letter informing that the case has been dropped. Petitioner sent several reminders to reopen the grievances and lastly on 19.05.15 sent such letter but with no result.  On the other hand O.P.No.2 whimsically issue disconnection notice for nonpayment of bills for the period of Oct’2012 to Dec’2012 and Jan’13 to March, 2013. Therefore, petitioner filed this case before this Forum against the O.Ps with above mentioned prayer because O.P did not entertain his legitimate objection amounting to deficiency in service for which he suffered pain and harassment.

O.P. N o.1 and 2 appeared and contested the case by filing written version and alleges that all the allegations of the complainant are false and he suppressed the material fact. That O.P raised bill as per meter reading and as per consumption unit of customer. That, petitioner is usual defaulter in payment of the bills in respect of consumption of unit and even without paying her outstanding bills enjoying service of the O.P. That, O.P never issued any inflated bills. That, a bill of Rs.1,18,413/- was issued as per reading unit consumed by the petitioner including fine and other charges and following the order of the Ld.Forum he deposited 50% amount of Rs.59202/-. He never updated her payment in respect of his service connection and outstanding dues amount increasing day by day and for some illegal benefit she filed this case. The O.P has no deficiency and negligence in service and O.P prays for dismissal of this case.

 To establish the case, complainant has relied upon an affidavit-in-chief sworn by him as P.W.-1 with some documents. The documents filed like Xerox copies of letter dt.19.05.15 and other letters, disconnection letter, intimation for hearing, for dropping the proceedings, copy of monthly bills and objection letter etc.  O.P. files documents the copy of electricity bills for the year 2016 and up to April, 2017 showing consumption of electricity by the petitioner. O.P also cross examined petitioner by putting questionnaires and petitioner answered the same. O.P did not adduce any evidence as O.P.W.

 DECISIONS WITH REASONS

Giving due consideration to the contents of the complaint petition, documentary evidence on record, hearing, argument advanced by the lawyers of both sides, the Ld. Forum has come to the findings as follows: -

P.W.-1 in his examination in chief deposed that O.P issued inflated bills for Oct’ to December 2012, complainant sent letters for correction of the inflated bills and thereafter complaint before Grievance Cell. On 28.01.14 was fixed hearing in the Grievance Cell. But petitioner failed to appear before the Cell. The letter of disconnection was issued and he made last correspondence on 19.05.15 to reconsider his grievance petition praying for date of hearing. Therefore, petitioner inspite of giving opportunity by the O.P for explanation over the inflated bills but petitioner did not avail the opportunity showing ground of illness. She did not send anybody with documents to represent her before the Grievance Cell. Ld. Lawyer for the O.P argues that petitioner is a consumer in the category of Tariff A (CM-U) i.e. having Rural Commercial Connection. The electricity bills submitted by the O.P for the period 2016, February to April, 2017 show that total unit of consumption 384 and amount payable as gross demand Rs.34,418/-and showing an outstanding amount of Rs.59,281/-. It may be mentioned following order of this court he deposited 50% of her arrears due i.e. Rs.59.282/- in the month of April 2016. It is also mentioned in this bill.

Her consumption for the period May to July, 2016 was 658 unit and August to October 2016 total consumption was 922 units. Therefore the consumption is not same in each and every quarter. As I have already stated that she consumed 384 unit during the period February to April, 2016.

The bill for the period February to April, 2017 goes to show that total unit was consumed 275 unit and amount payable was Rs.2136/-. All the electricity bills for the period May 2016 to April, 2017 specifically mentioned outstanding bills payable by the petitioner to the tune of Rs.89844/-. Petitioner has been paying according to current consumption of units throughout this period and no payment was made towards the outstanding dues.

From the evidence of the petitioner and documents filed it is clear that the consumption of the petitioner as Rural Commercial Connection throughout the year is not same as it varies from time to time. O.P argues that the correct reading was taken and petitioner is in the habit of not paying outstanding bills. Petitioner failed to prove by sufficient evidence whether the reading was incorrect or inflated. The electricity bills for the period of year 2010 and 2011 are filed by the petitioner where the unit consumed varies from time to time. Even petitioner did not appear before the Grievance Cell and did not take any other initiative to enquire as to why she was served with arrear bills in Oct’2012 to March, 2013 showing outstanding dues. It is also clear that O.P was deficient in service and harass the petitioner by issuing bills with heavy amount abruptly during the above mentioned period without showing actual periodical consumption to justify the outstanding bills with heavy amounts. O.P did not took the pain to make any local inspection to explain the consumer to her satisfaction the actual unit consumed by her amounted to such an outstanding dues. Necessarily such conduct of O.P causes mental harassment to the petitioner. 

In the light of our above discussion this Form finds that the petitioner received electricity bills showing outstanding dues. She has already paid 50% of the outstanding bills following the order of this Forum. The remaining dues as per the subsequent electricity bills is payable by the petitioner. The consumption of the petitioner is not uniform and it varies from time. The O.P should issue bills regularly showing actual and correct reading to avoid any further disputes. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to get relief accordingly.

Fees paid are correct.

Hence it is,

ORDERED

That the case being No.CC-20/2016 is allowed on contest but in part. O.Ps are directed to issue electricity bill as per actual unit consumption. The outstanding dues payable by the petitioner for the period Oct’12 to Dec’12 and Jan’13 to March,13 will be paid by the petitioner by 10 (ten) equal monthly instalments with the current bills from the month of  June,2017.

Petitioner is also entitled to get Rs.2000/- for as compensation for mental harassment and pain and Rs.1000/- as litigation cost which O.P should pay within one month of passing this order otherwise petitioner is at liberty to proceed with the law.

Let copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.