IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAMBALPUR.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.97 OF 2008
Shital Prasad Pradhan,
S/O. Late Nabaghan Pradhan,
Aged about 69 years,
R/O. Kayakud, P.O.: Mochibahal,
Via: Jujomura, Dist: Sambalpur. …….. Complainant.
Vrs.
1. Western Electrical Supply Company,
Represented by Executive Engineer,
Sambalpur Electricity Division,
Sambalpur.
2. S.D.O., Electrical Sub-Division,
WESCO,Rairakhol,
P.O./P.S.: Rairakhol, Dist: Sambalpur.
3. Junior Engineer-cum-Sectional Officer,
Electrical Section Office, WESCO,
Hatibari under Jujomura P.S.
District: Sambalpur. ……… Opp.Parties.
For Complainant : Shri P.K.Sahu and
Shri D.Hota, Advocates.
For Opp.Parties : Shri M.S.Munda,
Junior Engineer-cum-
Sectional Officer(O.P.No.3)
DATE OF ORDER : 18.04.2009
P R E S E N T :
SHRI A.K.PUROHIT, PRESIDENT
A N D
SHRI T.JAYAPURIA, MEMBER.
: O R D E R :
SHRI T.JAYAPURIA, MEMBER: – The complaint has been filed showing deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. The brief fact of the case is that the complainant has taken electric connection to his newly constructed house on 20.7.1997. He has deposited all the required fees towards electric connection and was allowed Consumer No.KKD-13 under
domestic category and his corresponding new number is 0411402011517. It is alleged that no meter reading was taken from the date of connection of the electric line till June, 2002 and also the complainant had not received any bill from the O.Ps. The complainant received a bill on 3.6.2002 which was neither prepared as per the electricity code nor was signed by any authority and the bill amount was Rs.13,505.62 paise. The complainant was surprised to know how such a bill has been prepared without following any procedure.
2. The complainant contacted the O.P.No.3, who replied that the bill has been prepared and signed by the O.P.No.2 and advised the complainant to contact O.P.No.2. The complainant subsequently received five numbers of bills which were for a huge amount of arrears and prepared without taking any meter reading. No doubt the complainant was ready to pay the monthly bill if it would have been given to him but without giving bills on monthly basis, the O.Ps sent bill with huge amount showing arrears against him for which the complainant was not liable to pay such huge arrear amount which according to the complainant, amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.
3. The further allegation of the complainant is that suddenly on 24.4.2003 the electric line was disconnected, when the complainant was away from his home, though the lady members approached the O.Ps no one paid any heed to them. The complainant met the O.P.No.3 and wanted the reason for such disconnection of electric line from his house. The O.P.No.3 stated that the line was disconnected due to non-payment of electricity dues. The complainant approached the O.P.No.2 several time for restoration of the electricity to his house but there was no result. The complainant met the O.Ps last on 24.10.2007. The complainant alleges that though there was contact between the complainant and the O.Ps to give uninterrupted supply of electric energy and the complainant was ready to pay the dues, having no fault of the complainant the O.Ps disconnected the electric line without giving any notice as per mandatory provision of the electricity Act which is deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. Hence this case with prayer to direct the O.Ps to restore electric connection after finalizing the dues legally recoverable from the complainant and to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for causing harassment and mental agony.
4. The O.Ps put in appearance and filed their joint written version through O.P.No.3. It is contended by the O.Ps that the complainant was supplied with electric line of 1 KW load and it is also contended that he was given Consumer Card bearing Consumer No.KKD-13 and its corresponding new number is 411402011517. It is further contended that the complainant was supplied electric connection by the erst while OSEB and subsequently the charge was taken by WESCO on zonal basis. Consumers were not paying electricity dues regularly showing different reasons such as meter reading was not taken regularly or properly and the O.Ps were not taking electricity charges from the consumer as per provision etc. Non-payment of electricity dues resulted in disconnection of electric line which happened in the case of the complainant. According to the O.Ps, the electricity dues is calculated by technical personnel of WESCO and the O.Ps rightly calculated the arrear dues amounting to Rs.13,505.62 against the complainant. The matter would have been settled between the complainant and the O.P.Nos.1 & 2 without preferring this case before the Hon’ble Forum.
5. It is further contended by the O.Ps that the complainant is not a bonafide consumer as per the provision laid down under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 since the provision service as laid down in the Act does not allow the complainant here to render any service since no electricity dues were paid by him regularly and as such no service was rendered to him and ultimately electric line was disconnected. Arrear dues up to August, 2001 was Rs.11,895.22 on load factor basis for last 51 months. Thereafter the complainant never approached the O.Ps nor filed any complaint showing his dissatisfaction over the bill. In the bills there is a general notice for disconnection of electric supply if payment is not made sooner. The complainant had never paid any part bill of the arrear dues instead of such notice of disconnection. When the complainant approached the O.P.No.2, he explained the reason for disconnection and he requested the complainant to make 50 per cent payment of the arrear dues so that the line will be connected to his house. But the complainant did not agree to pay any amount against the arrear dues. The O.Ps have never violated any statutes of the Electricity Act and they wanted to give service to the complainant on payment of arrear dues. The complainant had never approached the O.P. No.2 as alleged in the complaint petition.
6. The submission of the O.Ps is that the complainant was supplied electric connection to his house on 20.7.1997 on certain terms and conditions and to pay the energy consumption charges regularly but the complainant defaulted in making payment as per stipulation which caused arrear dues upon him. The O.Ps have tolerated till 24.4.2003 and when the dues was not paid, ultimately, the electric line was disconnected. The complainant unilaterally violated the terms and conditions of the contract made with the O.Ps, so the complainant was estopped to say that the O.Ps have violated the norms of the contract. Since the O.Ps have committed no deficiency in service as per provision of the Electricity Act and the Consumer Protection Act, the case is liable to be dismissed and no relief can be given to the complainant as prayed for.
7. Heard the parties and perused the documents available on record. It is seen that electric connection was given to the house of the complainant in the year 1997 and till 3.6.2002 no meter reading was taken or no bill was submitted by the O.Ps to the complainant and without giving any prior notice as required under Section-56 of the Electricity Act,2003(cited by the complainant) disconnection was made. It is mentioned in the Act itself that clear 15 days notice should be given to pay the arrear dues if not paid then line will be disconnected. On the second part of the same section, it is mentioned that no sum due from any consumer under this section shall be recoverable after the period of two years from the date when such sum became first due unless such sum has was shown continuously as recoverable as arrear charges for electric supply. The complainant, relying on this section submitted that the O.Ps are not entitled to realize such arrear dues from him as per provision contended in the Electricity Act
8. On the other hand the O.Ps have provided electric connection since 1997 and till disconnection of the electric line that is on 24.4.2003, no initiation has been taken by the complainant to pay the monthly dues. The complainant has filed one Consumer Card where it is seen that payment was made by the complainant on 25.8.2000 for an amount of
Rs.400/-. There is also mention on the Consumer Card itself that a minimum charge will be paid at the rate of Rs.90/- per month and subsequently it was revised to Rs.222/- from 12/1998. It does not appear from the documents available on record that the complainant has taken any step to clear the electricity dues. There is general notice in the bill itself issued by the O.Ps to pay the electricity dues, which makes each and every consumer alert to pay the minimum dues fixed by the O.Ps that is in the present case initially it was Rs.97/- and subsequently revised o Rs.222/- per month since 1998. From the materials available on record, it also appears that no alertness has been shown on behalf of the complainant to pay the electricity dues, which also forms default on his part. On the other hand the O.Ps have given the bills from 2002 till disconnection of the electric line but no specific notice has been given for disconnection of electric line as per provision of the Electricity Act which forms deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. On the other hand, it is seen that fault has been found on both sides. The complainant is also not free from responsibility to pay the electricity dues as per consumption. Hence order:
The complaint petition is partly allowed. The O.Ps are directed to
make fresh calculation of arrear dues of the complainant basing on
minimum charges mentioned in the Consumer Card provided by
them and supply the same to the complainant for payment. The arrear
dues so calculated freshly be realized from the complainant in four
equal installments within six months. The electric connection be
given to the house of the complainant immediately on receipt of the
first installment. The complainant is similarly directed to pay the
arrear dues along with the current dues after connection of the line
regularly. The parties are to bear their own costs.
The case is disposed of accordingly.
T.JAYAPURIA
MEMBER.
SHRI A.K.PUROPHIT, PRESIDENT. I agree.
Dictated and corrected by me.
MEMBER.