F I N A L   O R D E R

This is a complaint U/S 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986 with the prayer directing the O.Ps. that the raised bill dated 19.03.2013 of Rs.55,226/- in illegal, void and whimsical, to prepare the electric bill properly, easy installments, to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation and Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost and other relief.

The complainant’s case in short is that the complainant is a consumer of the O.Ps. vide consumer No.522866 (Domestic) and vide Service Connection No.17977/D. The said service connection electric meter was defective and the O.Ps. have replaced a new meter in the same service connection on 16.03.2011 being new meter No.G-302229. The O.Ps. raised a bill for the period of Sep’13, Oct’13 and Nov’13 of Rs.55,226/- along with outstanding of Rs.2,836/- for the period of Apr’10, May’10, Sep’10 to Nov’10, Sep’11 to Feb’12,  Sep’12 to Aug’13, which is illegal. The complainant raised protest by submitting written complain as well oral complain to the O.Ps. but the O.Ps. did not pay any heed  to the matter. Finding no alternative the complainant was forced to come before this Forum.

The O.P. No.1 contested the case by filing written version stating inter alia that the complaint is not maintainable, there is no cause of action, the complainant has filed this case with an object to get wrongful gain, denying the allegations of the complaint petition and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

The O.P. No.2 did not contest the case either appearing on the date of hearing or by filing any written version. So, this case is heard ex-parte against the O.P. No.2.

DECISIONS WITH REASONS

To prove his case the complainant has submitted some photocopies of bill, payment receipts, yellow card, submitted written and oral evidence.

The O.P. No.1 has submitted his written version but did not produce or adduce any evidence.

We carefully peruse the documents, evidence and considered the argument advanced by the parties.

On scrutiny of the photocopy of yellow card it appears that old meter was defective as such O.Ps. have installed new meter being No.G-302229 on 16.03.2011. in the yellow card unit consumption shows 00099 in the old meter. Thereafter O.Ps. have collected reading on 25.02.2012 showing 2894 as unit consumed, reading on 18.05.2012 showing 3491 as unit consumed and last reading on 15.05.2013 showing 4064 as unit consumed and meter readers signatures are specifically mentioned on the each reading date in the column of “Read by” in the yellow card. But the O.Ps. have raised bill of Rs.55,226/- for the month of Sep’13, Oct’13 and Nov’13 where it mentioned 20.09.2013 as billing date 19.09.2013 as present reading date and 30.06.2013 as previous reading date. The said alleged disputed bill the previous reading date is not tally with the yellow card last reading date, moreover the unit consumption shows in the yellow card and in the disputed period bill shows huge different of unit consumption. As such the complainant raised protest with written and oral complaint with the O.Ps. but they did not take care of the allegation of the complainant. The O.P. No.1 contested the case by filing written version denying the allegation of the complaint but did not clarify on what basis such huge quantity of unit consumption shown in a quarterly bill where outstanding shows Rs.2,836/- only and such unit consumption and dates of reading are not mentioned in the yellow card. Such type of character of the O.Ps. it automatically be presumed that the O.Ps. have prepared the bill for the disputed period at their own will not according to proper reading of the electric meter.

In view of the above discussions we find that the bill for the month of Sep’13, Oct’13 and Nov’13 of Rs.55,226/- raised by the O.Ps. is not correct rather apparently seems to be absurd and the O.Ps. have negligent and deficiency in service for non-reply of the allegation and protest of the huge amount of bill dated 20.09.2013 by the complainant.

Considering the above circumstances we are of opinion that the O.Ps. have to raise a bill afresh for the month of Sep’13, Oct’13 and Nov’13 taking into consideration the average unit consumed with in the period starting from 16.03.2011 to 15.05.2013 and to give an opportunity to the complainant to pay the dues amount if any on calculation after deducting the amount already paid by the complainant in easy installments, to pay Rs 5000/- as compensation for harassment, mental pain and agony and Rs 2000/- as litigation cost to the complainant.

In the above premises the case succeeds in part.

Fees paid is correct.

Hence, it is

ORDERED

that the complaint case being No. CC-90/2013 is allowed on contest against the O.P. No.1 without cost and ex-parte against the rest.

Accordingly the complainant do get an award directing the O.Ps. to raise fresh bill for the month Sep’13, Oct’13 and Nov’13 taking into consideration the average unit consumed with in the period starting from 16.03.2011 to 15.05.2013 and to give an opportunity to the complainant to pay the dues amount if any on calculation after deducting the amount already paid by the complainant in easy installments, to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for harassment, mental pain and agony, Rs.2,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant within one month from the date of this order failing which the total awarded amount of Rs.7,000/- will carry interest @8% p.a. from the date of filing of this complaint till the date of full realization and the complainant will be at liberty to put this order in execution in accordance with law.

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