Per Shri B.A.Shaikh, Hon’ble Presiding Member.
1. This appeal is filed by the original complainant against the order dated 16/03/2011 passed by the District Consumer Forum Washim in consumer complaint No.100/2010 by which the complaint has been dismissed.
2. The case of the original complainant/appellant in brief is as under.
3. The complainant had taken electric connection to the motor pump of the well of his field, before 10 to12 years from respondents. The electric motor was used for 5 to 6 years and the complainant paid electric bills of the same as issued by the respondents from time to time. However before 8 to 9 years the electric conductor lines/wires were stolen away and therefore the complainant had made complaints to the respondent herein about the same from time to time. The electric supply was not restored thereafter. However on 09/11/2010 the complainant received electric bill of Rs.47,660/- from the respondent. Prior to that also complainant had received bill dated 23/06/2010 for Rs.46,340/-. The complainant had made grievance about the same to the respondents, but the respondents had demanded bribe for restoration of electric supply and cancellation of that bill. Therefore consumer complaint was filed before the Forum by the complainant claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- from the respondents and cost of the complaint.
4. The respondents resisted that complaint by filing reply/written version before the Forum. They submitted in brief that electric connection was given to the electric motor pump of the complainant by them in the year 1985. They denied that the electric wires were stolen away and electric supply was therefore dis-continued. They also denied that the complaint about the theft of electric wires was made to them by the complainant. They however admitted that the bills of Rs.46.340/- and Rs.47,660/- were issued to the complainant by them. It is their case in brief that after giving electric connection in the month of April-1985, the regular three monthly bills were issued by them to the complainant. But he did not pay those bills and therefore, after the last bill of Rs.47,660/- was not paid by him, his electric connection was disconnected and meter was removed. Therefore it was prayed by the respondents that complaint may be dismissed.
5. The complainant in support of the complaint had filed before the Forum only the aforesaid two disputed bills. On the other hand respondents had filed before the Forum copy of the Consumer Presonal Ledger (CPL) relating to the electric connection of the complainant. The respondents had also produced receipt of Rs.850.80/- about payment of one of the bill on 12/01/1993 by the complainant.
6. It is seen from the copy of impugned order that the complainant after filing of the complaint did not appear before the Forum and he also did not adduce evidence in support of his case of theft of electric wires and disruption of electric supply. The Forum perused the copy of the CPL filed by the respondents and observed in the impugned order that the complainant has not prayed for cancellation of the disputed bill and simply claimed compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. The Forum came to the conclusion that the complaint is false and frivolous and therefore the Forum dismissed the complaint by passing the order. The Forum however imposed exemplary cost of Rs.2,000/- on the complainant to be deposited with the consumer welfare fund.
7. As observed above this appeal is filed by the original complainant. We have heard Advocate Shri Mr.R.P.Waghmare appearing for appellant/original complainant and Advocate Mrs.Moharir appearing for respondent. Advocate of respondent to-day filed affidavit of Asst. Accountant Mr. Anilkumar Babusa Yermal in pursuance of direction given by this Commission on 05/10/2016. The learned Advocate of the appellant produced in appeal the copy of the information dated 20/01/2014 furnished by Assistant Engineer of the respondents to the complainant and he submitted that as per that information, obtained under Right to Information Act, the respondents admitted that the electric wires connecting the complainant’s motor pump were stolen away. He thus submitted that when the respondents admitted the theft of the wires, it can be said that the disputed bills issued by the respondents is illegal as there was no electric supply to the electric motor pump of the complainant. He therefore requested that impugned order may be set aside and complaint may be allowed.
8. On the other hand, the learned Advocate of the respondent submitted that in the said information supplied under Right to Information Act, it is not admitted by the respondent that the electric wires were stolen away. She submitted that actually in that information, it is simply stated that the employees say that the electric wires were stolen away and thus it is not first hand information or information based on record. She also submitted that no report of that incident was lodged to the respondent as seen from that information. There was no entry recorded with the respondent about the theft of the electric wires. She also submitted that the copy of the CPL as produced before the Forum went unchallenged which shows that the meter reading was recorded from time to time and on that basis disputed bill was issued. She therefore requested that in the absence of any evidence before the Forum about the theft of electric wires, the Forum has rightly dismissed the complaint.
9. In reply the learned Advocate of the appellant submitted that the complainant failed to appear before the Forum as his Advocate did not call him to appear and adduce evidence before the Forum.
10. We find that before the Forum there was no evidence to show that electric wires were stolen away and therefore electric supply of the motor pump of the complainant was disrupted or dis-continued. The copy of the CPL shows that the meter reading was taken regularly from the meter of the complainant and there was no rebuttal evidence of the same before the Forum. Therefore we find no reason to dis-believed the entries recorded in that CPL.
11. The appellant/original complaint for the first time in appeal filed the aforesaid information obtained under Right to Information Act. The said information supplied is very vague. It simply shows that employees say that the electric wires stolen away. It is not made clear as to who were those employees and from which source they got information about theft of electric wire. In our view in the absence of specific information as to how it was learnt that wires were stolen away and who gave that information to the employees, the said information obtained under Right to Information Act and filed in appeal is of no help to the complainant to prove that at the relevant time the disputed bill was issued the electric wires connecting the motor pump of the complainant were stolen away and that therefore there was disruption of electric supply.
12. Moreover the complainant in the complaint did not seek relief for cancellation of disputed electric bill. He simply claimed compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. We find that since it is not proved by the complainant that the disputed electric bill was issued without providing electric supply and therefore there is no question of grant of compensation to the complainant.
13. Therefore the complaint has been rightly dismissed by the Forum. However we find that only because the complainant did not appear before the Forum and failed to adduce the evidence in support of the complaint, it can not be said that the complaint was false to his knowledge. Therefore the imposition exemplary cost of Rs.2,000/- is not just and proper and hence it needs to be set aside.
// ORDER //
- The appeal is partly allowed,
- The finding of the Forum about dismissal of complaint is
confirmed in appeal.
- However the direction given under impugned order to the
examplary costs of Rs.2000/- is here by set aside.
- No order as to cost in appeal.
- Copy of order be furnished to both parties free of cost.
