Ld Advocate for the complainant is present. Judgement is ready It is pronounced in open Commission in 8 pages 4 sheet of paper.

BY – SRI.SAURAV CHANDRA, MEMBER

1. Brief fact of the Complainant’s case is that the Complainant is a permanent resident of the above noted address and a Citizen of India by birth. Complainant is a bona fide STW Consumer of Electricity at the above noted premises under Tariff Class-C(T) vide Service Connection against Consumer Id: 223042176, Old Meter No.HXO23231 and New Meter No.RSX20980 for running and maintaining his livelihood by way of agriculture. The Complainant is paying the bills on regular basis as charged by the Ops. Suddenly, the Complainant was served an Electricity Bill dated: 29.12.2020 amounting to Rs.2,093.00 against 484 Units for the period 23.10.2020 to 25.11.2020. The Complainant objected by issuing the letter dated: 25.01.2021 to the Op No.3 for such fictitious bill with a demand to examine and replace the meter with a new one.

2. A Bill dated: 30.12.2020 for subsequent month amounting to Rs.948.00 against 291 Units for the period 25.11.2020 to 25.12.2020 was received by the Complainant which he paid in full along with the Bill for the previous month totaling Rs.(2,093.00 + 948.00) = Rs.3,050.00.

3. On 05.02.2021 the Op No.2 during visit for meter reading of the Complainant’s premises, recorded the allegedly reflected reading of 3312 Units for 42 Days during the period 25.12.2020 to 05.02.2021 which is reflected in the Bill of February dated: 02.03.2021 total amounting to Rs.14,011.00 (After Due Date) out of which Rs.13,871.00 (Within Due Date) was allegedly charged for 3312 Units against such 42 Days including 606 Units as Pick Hour Unit.

4. On 08.02.2021 the Complainant again write a letter to the Op No.3 with a request to replace the old STW defective Meter No.RSX20980 to avoid further complications in the current month bill i.e. March’2021 like the previous month’s fictitious bill. But, without any such replacement, the representative of Op No.3 again visited the premises and recorded the reading such defective meter for 758 Units during the period of 26 Days i.e. from 05.02.2021 to 04.03.2021 which is reflected in the Bill dated: 16.03.2021 amounting to Rs.17,999.00 (Within Due Date) for March’2021 along with the outstanding bill for previous months. In the said Bill Rs.4,028.98 was charged against 758 fictitious Units during the period 05.02.2021 to 04.03.2021. In this Bill, the Ops for the first time admitted with a remark that the “Meter RSX20980 seems defective. Above reading on estimated basis.”

5. Surprisingly a notice for disconnection was served upon the Complainant on 16.03.2021against which a letter dated: 18.03.2021 was sent to the Op No.3 to consider all the previous fictitious bills dated: 29.12.2020, 30.12.2020, 02.03.2021 and 16.03.2021 respectively. But, after deafening silence by the respondent authorities, the Complainant reluctantly paid Rs.14,010.00 on 30.03.2021 to avoid the disconnection due to it was the high time for water irrigation.

6. Thereafter, the Op continuously served fictitious Bills for the month of April, May and June’2021 dated: 12.04.2021, 06.05.2021, 08.06.2021 amounting to Rs.1,551.00, Rs.3,681.00, Rs.516.00 towards consumption of 321, 834 and 104 Units during the period 04.03.2021 to 05.04.2021, 05.04.2021 to 27.04.2021 and 27.04.2021 to 05.06.2021 respectively. The Complainant paid all such exorbitant and fictitious Bills for the month of December’2020 to June’2021 in full based upon such defective meter which is liable to re-assess and reimbursed.

7. The Complainant issued several letters to the Op No.1, 2 and 3 on 25.01.2021, 08.02.2021, 08.03.2021 and 18.03.2021 for changing the defective meter and readjustment/reassessment of bills but, except replacement of old and defective meter with a new one in June’2021 only assurances was given without paying any heed to the series of letters of the Complainant as yet.

8. Finding no other alternatives, the Complainant has filed this case before the Ld. Commission u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

9. The cause of action if this case arose on 25^th January’2021 when the Op No.3 shown the deafening silence over the first representation made by the Complainant.

The Complainant, therefore, prays for :-

1. To set aside all the disputed and fictitious Bills dated: 29.12.2020, 30.12.2020, 02.03.2021, 16.03.2021, 12.04.2021, 06.05.2021 and 08.06.2021 respectively.

2. An order for reassessment by issuing afresh electricity bill for the period 23.10.2020 to 05.06.2021 by the Ops.

3. An order for refund of excess bill of Rs.21,000.00 to the Complainant by the Ops.

4. An order to pay Compensation of Rs.50,000.00 to the Complainant for mental agony, deficiency of service, loss of opportunities, harassment and breach of trust by the Ops.

5. An order for payment of Litigation Cost of Rs.20,000.00 to the Complainant by the Ops.

6. Any such order or orders for such mala-fide intention of deliberate lapses, gross negligence, deficiency in service and unfair trade practices on the part of the Ops.

10. Notices were duly served upon the Ops but, Ops preferred to see that the case be decided ex-parte against them.

11. Under the above circumstances, the Complainant has prayed for ex-parte order against the Ops.

12. Points for determination are:

1. Is the case maintainable in its present form and in law?
2. Is the complainant entitled to the relief(s) as sought for?

13. Decision with reasons

1. Both the Points No.1 and II, being inter related to each other, are taken up together for discussion for sake of brevity and  convenience.

2. We have carefully perused and assessed the Affidavit of the Complainant, Written Notes on Argument and Additional Written Notes on Argument filed by the Complainant with other related papers and documents.

14. Having regards had to the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of evidence, it is evident that the Complainant being a consumer has alleged gross negligence, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice against the Ops. He runs the Service Connection No. (Consumer Id) 223042176, Meter No.RSX20980 for maintaining his livelihood; the bundle of facts indicate that this case is maintainable in its present form and in law.

15. In the instance case, the Complainant submitted a list of documents comprises of Annexure - ‘A’ to ‘D’ total 33 Pages including disputed Electric Bills for the period December’2020 to June’2021, A Comparative Statement for Consumption of Units and Bills Amount for the same months during the F.Y 2019-20 and 2020-21, various correspondences by the Complainant, a Legal Notice by the Complainant to the Ops and the Written Notes of Arguments.

16. From the above submitted documents, it is carefully observed; the Complainant has stated on oath that he has paid all the bills as charged by the Op till June’2021 therefore, it seems not a single penny is to be outstanding. It is noted from the bill of March, April and May’2021, the Meter No.RSX20980 is a defective one and therefore, the meter reading was taken on estimated basis.

17. Moreover, from the Complainant’s series of letters dated: 25.01.2021, 08.02.2021, 08.03.2021 and 18.03.2021 respectively as well as the submitted Comparative Statement for Consumption of Units and Bill Amount for the same months during the F.Y 2019-20 and 2020-21, it is evident that all such bills are generated since December’2020 to June’2021 are fictitious and on estimated basis, having no base. It is to be noted here that the Complainant has paid all such outstanding bills for the period December’2020 to June’2021 to the tune of Rs.26,868.00 towards 6104 Units in total in spite of the fact that all such demands were estimated, illegal and fictitious. Ops issued bill on basis of presumption and not as per actual consumption. Demand of Ops on the basis of higher Units shown in bill is illegal, arbitrary and amounted to deficiency in service.

18. According to complaint a notice of disconnection was served upon the Complainant on 16.03.2021 by the Ops asking Rs.14,010 from the Complainant during high time for irrigation despite the Complainant continuously alleging for replacing the defective meter and reassess or revise the outstanding bills. Being assured by Ops, the Complainant was on good hope and belief that he will receive a fresh and correct bill, but he was kept waiting for an uncertain period without any activity from Ops’ end till March’2021, when the Ops again issued number of fictitious and estimated bills for the month of April, May and June’2021 respectively to the tune of Rs.1,551.00, Rs.3,681.00 and Rs.516.00 without replacing the defective meter, by putting absurd and fictitious meter reading of 321 Units, 834 Units and 516 Units respectively without paying any heed to him. Complainant added that he never consumed any electrical energy at any point of time till date so that he can be charged to the above tunes of money and Ops’ bills dated: 29.12.2020, 30.12.2020, 02.03.2021, 16.03.2021, 12.04.2021, 06.05.2021 and 08.06.2021 are not only erroneous, but also fictitious, bogus and baseless.

19. Moreover, the Commission is in view, in some rural area seasonal cultivation and irrigation depend upon the STW connections. Such type of disconnections notice should not be whimsically served whereas there is a major fault on the part of the Ops by not replacing the defective meter and generating estimated bill on the basis of reading of such defective meter. Regular redresses of complaint of the consumers are required. Meter should be periodically examined by the expert, here in the instant case the meter was inspected on 05.02.2021 but, not by any expert; no mechanical test of the meter was done. After making complaint and complaint by series of letters, the Ops ultimately replaced the old meter with a new one in June’2021.

20. Therefore, from the evidence of Complainant it clearly transpires that there are elements of Unfair Trade Practice, Negligence and Deficiency in Service by the Ops.

1. Now, coming to the matter of reliefs. The Ops can’t get absolved from the mischief of Negligence, Unfair Trade Practice, Harassment and Deficiency in Service. So, we think it would just and proper if we direct the Ops to overhaul the accounts of the Complainant and adjust all such paid disputed bills according to average of meter reading of preceding Six Months from date of disputed  bill dated: 29.12.2020, 30.12.2020, 02.03.2021, 16.03.2021, 12.04.2021, 06.05.2021 and 08.06.2021 respectively, for service connection No.(Consumer Id) 223042176, Meter No.RSX20980 and to receive consumption charges without imposing any surcharge and penalty and in case any amount out of demanded amount was deposited by Complainant, same be also be refunded or adjusted in the account of Complainant; to pay Compensation of Rs.5,000.00 towards mental agony and harassment and Rs.5,000.00 for Litigation Costs to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of this order in default the Ops, jointly or severally will have to pay Rs.100.00 per diem to the Complainant till full compliance of the order.

2. Accordingly, both the points are decided in favour of the Complainant.

3. Thus the complaint case succeeds.

Hence, it is

O R D E R E D

That the CC-126 of 2022 be and the same is allowed ex-parte against the Ops.

4. The Ops are hereby directed to adjust all paid bills, by applying proper multiplying factor (if any), according to the average of meter reading of preceding Six Months from date of disputed bills raised on 29.12.2020, 30.12.2020, 02.03.2021, 16.03.2021, 12.04.2021, 06.05.2021 and 08.06.2021, for Service Connection against Consumer Id: 223042176 Meter No.RSX20980 and to receive consumption charges without imposing any surcharge and penalty. In case of any amount out of demanded amount was deposited by Complainant, same also be refunded or adjusted in the account of Complainant. In addition to that Rs.5,000.00 is awarded towards mental agony and harassment and Rs.5,000.00 is awarded for litigation expenses of the Complainant.

5. Alternatively, the Ops may settle the dispute with the Complainant by asking to pay the @60% of the disputed bill amount after deduction of the surcharge and penalty in consultation with the Superior Officer.

6. The Ops are further directed to restore the electric connection if disconnected in the event of any occasion arose out the cause of action of the instant case.

7. The Ops shall comply the above directions within 30 days from the date of this order; in default the Ops will be jointly or severally liable to pay Rs.100.00 per diem to the Complainant till full compliance of the order.

8. The Complainant would be at liberty to put the order into execution u/s 71 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and to initiate a proceeding u/s 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

1. Let a copy of this judgment be provided to the parties free of cost. The judgment be uploaded forthwith in the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.