Date of filing:-19/04/2016.

Date of Order:-06/12/2017

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (COURT)

B A R G A R H.

Consumer Complaint No. 6 of 2016

Anil Kumar Sahu, son of Ashok Kumar Sahu, aged about 41(forty one) years, resident of ward No.06(six), Lengu Mishra Chowk, Bargarh, Ps. Bargarh (Town), Po/Dist. Bargarh. ..... ..... ..... Complainant.

- V e r s u s -

1. WESCO, represented through its Executing Engineer, Bargarh Electrical Division at Bargarh, Po/Ps/Dist. Bargarh.

2. The Sectional Officer, Electrical Section No.II, WESCO, Bargarh, Po/Ps/Dist. Bargarh.

   ..... ..... ..... Opposite Parties.

3. Ashok Kumar Sahu, aged about 65(sixty five) year, son of Late Chhedilal Sahu,

4. Alok Kumar Sahu, aged about 38(thirty eight) year, son of Ashok Kumar Sahu,

5. Anup Kumar Sahu, aged about 34(thirty four) years, son of Ashok Kumar Sahu,

All resident of Ward No.06(six), Lengu Mishra Chowk, Bargarh, Po/Ps/Dist.Bargarh. ..... ..... ..... Proforma Opposite Parties.

Counsel for the Parties.

For the Complainant:- Sri D. Mishra, Advocate with other Advocates.

For the Opposite Party No.1(one):- Sri T.C. Tripathy, Advocate with other Advocates.

and No.2(two)

For the Opposite Party No.3(three):- Sri S.K.Sahu, Advocate with other Advocates.

to No.5(five)

-: P R E S E N T :-

Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... P r e s i d e n t.

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r.

Ajanta Subhadarsinee ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r(w).

Dt.06/12/2017 -: J U D G E M E N T :-

Presented by Krishna Prasad Mishra, President:-

All the Opposite Party No.3(three), 4(four) & 5(five) are resident of Ward No.06, Lengu Mishra Chowk, Bargarh, Po/Ps/Dist-Bargarh.

Brief Facts of the case;-

The Complainant has preffered to file the case pertaining to the deficiencies in rendering service in a high handed attitude towards the complainant and the proforma Opposite Party No.2(two), 3(three) & 4(four) as hereunder.

The case of the Complainant is that all the Opposite Party No.2(two), 3(three) & 4(four) along with the Complainant are the regular consumer of the Opposite Party No.1(one) & 2(two), vide their individual Consumer No. 512122200019, 512122180203 and 512122200126, respectively are using the power supply to them and the Complainant is having the connection of the electricity vide Consumer No.512122180165 which is in the name of his grand father also paying their respective bill individually without any delay without any dispute, but suddenly on Dt-15.02.2016 all of a sudden the Opposite Party No.1(one) came to the house of the Complainant and served him with a notice in the name of one Chhedilal Sahu vide Lettrer No.19 in connection to one Consumer No.512122200025, demanding an amount of Rs.1,08,505/-(Rupees one lakh eight thousand five hundred five)only as an outstanding amount thus the Complainant believed it to be in the name of his grand father, received the same, but later on after proper verification the Complainant found that the notice to be a fake one as no such connection has ever been taken by their Grand-father or by any of his family members as such personally reported the matter to the Opposite Party No.2(two) and conveyed him that his Grand-father has taken only one electric connection vide Consumer No.512122180165 which is still in operation and the alleged connection vide Consumer No.512122200025 does not belong to his Grand-father nor it was known to their family member but in response the Opposite Party No.2(two) threatened him to disconnect all the connection supplied to their family members in individual name as mentioned above but in spite of that the Opposite Parties pressurized the Complainants to pay the said outstanding bill or else would disconnect all of their connection which as per him and the proforma Opposite Parties No.3(three), 4(four), & 5(five) amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiencies in rendering them the legitimate service hence have filed the case for redressal of their dispute for which all the Complainant and his family members are under going with mental agony against which have prayed before the Forum to quash the said notice served on Dt.15.02.2016 vide letter No.19(nineteen) and also prayed to restrain the Opposite Parties from disconnecting the regular running connection to his family members vide those mentioned consumers number and has claimed compensation amounting to Rs.45,000/-(Rupees forty five thousand )only and also has claimed Rs. 5,000/-(Rupees five thousand)only against litigation expenses.

In substantiating his case the Complainant has relied upon some following documents.

1. Xerox copy of Electricity Bill Dt.14.12.2015 bearing Consumer No.512122180165.

2. Notice /Letter No.19 Dt.15.02.2016 issued by the Opposite Party No.2(two).

3. Xerox Copy of Electricity Bill Dt.14.12.2015 bearing Consumer No.512122200019, No.512122200126 and Electricity Bill Dt.21/12/2015 bearing Consumer No.512122100203.

Having gone through the Complaint, the documents filed on their behalf and on hearing the advocate for the Complainant the case was admitted and notice was served on the Opposite Parties and in response both the Opposite Parties appeared and filed their version with all evasive contention to the complaint contending therein the alleged connection vide the Consumer No. 512122180165 stands in the name of the Chhedilal Sahu to the same premises wherein the present Complainant and Opposite Party No. 3(three), 4(four) & 5(five) have taken connection afresh and the arrear bill amounting to Rs. 1,08,505/-(Rupees one lakh eight thousand five hundred five)only is pending against the Grand-father of the Complainant vide Consumer No.5121 2220 0025, that they have claimed the said Chhedilal Sahu is their grand father for which the Complainant and other members of his family are liable to pay the same and to substantiate their case they have referred to Section 50, 56,(1) and Regulation (1) (dd), with it’s Explanation, Regulation.10(i)(iii)(vi), Regulation 13 (10)(b) of the Electricity Act 2003 and OERC Distribution (Condition of Supply) code 2004 and has prayed before the Forum to dismiss the case as it is not maintainable in view of the afore said provision and others, and in their support have also filed a bill against two Consumer No. 5121-2218-0615 and 5121-2220-0025.

Having gone through the entire record and on hearing the counsels for the respective parties some points for proper adjudication of the case cropped up before us.

1. Whether there is two numbers of Electricity Connection supplied to Chhedilal Sahu in the same premises against the Consumer No.5121-2218-0165 & 5121 22220 0025 and an outstanding amount of Rs.1,08,505/- (Rupees one lakh eight thousand five hundred five)only is pending against him ?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled to any compensation and the relief claimed for ?

While considering the points as to whether any outstanding amount of arrear bill is pending against the deceased Grand-father of the Complainant vide his Consumer No.512122180165. On perusal of the complaint, the version filed by the Opposite Parties and after vividly verifying the documents filed by both the Parties and after hearing their counsel. It came to our notice that the bill against the Consumer No.512122180165 is being used by the Complainant and also paying it’s billing amount time to time and no outstanding is there which is clearly evident from one bill issued by the Opposite Parties in the month 14^th December 2015 for the month of November-2015 wherein it has been clearly mentioned that it was an actual one and there is no mention of any outstanding amount, and also there is no reference of any other consumer number against the said Chhedilal Sahu. Further more from the billing amount filed by the Opposite Parties on being asked by the Forum it is also clearly shows that no outstanding amount is there in those statements and also it does not whisper any thing about any other consumer number existing in the name of the said Chhedilal Sahu of same place of the installation of the connection as alleged by the Opposite Parties.

Furthermore during the course of arguments the advocate for the Complainant urged before the Forum to direct the Opposite Parties to produce any documents relating to the said connection of Electricity to the said Chhedilal Sahu to establish that the alleged Chhedilal Sahu is the one and same person to whom such an additional connection has been given by the Opposite Parties against which such an alleged amount of outstanding amount is pending to which the Opposite Parties failed to produce so, as such having given regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the alleged Consumer No.5121 2220 0025 does not belong to the Grand-father of the Complainant against whom such an amount is outstanding as such in such circumstances the above mentioned provision which the Opposite Parties have referred in their support do not apply against the Complainant, nor against any those member of his family accordingly it is answered against the Opposite Parties.

Secondly while analyzing the question as to whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief as sought for by him, as in our preceding paragraph we have already discussed in detail about the question of the entitlement of the alleged number of the electricity connection vide Consumer No.5121 2220 0025, and have already given our finding that no such connection stands in the name of the Chhedilal Sahu nor any outstanding amount as alleged by the Opposite Parties is pending, as such it can be safely deducted now that the Opposite Parties have put unnecessary pressure on the Complainant and his family members without proper verification and ascertaining the facts as to consumer of the said consumer number thereby have caused mental agony to the Complainant and his family members which amounts to unfair trade practice, for which of such attitude the Complainant is obviously entitled for the relief claimed for by him for which both the Opposite Party No.1(one) and No.2(two) are liable jointly and severally, hence it is assertively answered in favor of the Complainant. Hence order follows.

O R D E R

Hence the Opposite Party No.1(one) and No.2(two) are jointly and severally directed not to disconnect the electricity connection supplied to the Complainant and the proforma Opposite Party No.3(three), 4(four) & 5(five) vide their Consumer No.512122180165, 512122200019, 512122180203 and 512122200126 and also further directed to waive out the outstanding amount vide Notice No.19 served to the Complainant on Dt.15.02.2016, and pay an amount of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand)only to the Complainant in lieu of compensation against mental agony of him and his family members within thirty days of receipt of the order. In default of which, future course of action as per the provision of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 would be taken against them.

Accordingly the complaint is allowed against the Opposite Parties and the same being pronounced in the open Forum is disposed off to-day i.e. on Dt.06.12.2017.

Typed to my dictation

and corrected by me.

    (Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra)

              P r e s i d e n t

                                   I agree,                                                                                           I agree,

                       (Ajanta Subhadarsinee)                                                               (Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash)

                            M e m b e r(w).                                                                                 M e m b e r