First Appeal No. A/523/2005, (Arisen out of Order Dated 20/07/2005 in Case No. CC/19/2004 of District Lakhisarai). Case: Electrical Executive Engineer, Lakhisarai and others Vs Md. Munishuddin.
| Case Number | First Appeal No. A/523/2005, (Arisen out of Order Dated 20/07/2005 in Case No. CC/19/2004 of District Lakhisarai) |
| Judges | Mr. Subhash Chandra Jha President and Mrs. Renu Sinha Member |
| Issue | Consumer Law |
| Judgement Date | May 11, 2011 |
Order:
S.C. Jha, President
-
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. Nobody appears for the respondent. The appeal has been directed against the order dated 20-07-2005 passed by two of the members of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Lakhisarai (hereinafter to be referred to as District Forum) in Consumer Complaint No. 19/2004, who seems to have disagreed with the verdict of the learned President of the said Forum and passed order holding the appellants responsible and negligent and thereby awarded Rs. 5000/- by way of compensation to the complainant-respondent with a direction for correction of the electric bill within two months from the date of passing of the order.
-
On the other hand, the President of the said Forum has also recorded separate judgement giving separate reasoning and thereby holding that appellants are not responsible and were not negligent in providing any service to the respondent, as such, the case of the complainant-respondent stood dismissed.
-
Nobody appeared for the respondent- Md. Munishuddin, who was complainant in the District Forum.
-
The complainant lodged the case with this averment that the electricity connection No. E-16AMP 001-CS2 stood in the name of his deceased father Md. Nayeem. He happened to be resident of rural area, as such, electricity bill should have been issued @ Rs. 80/- per month till,2003 but the bill for Rs. 18234/- in the month of May,2002 and Rs. 60264/- in the month of Februry,2004 were issued to the complainant. The complainant had already filed a petition dated 21-07-2001 to the Executive Engineer for correction of the bills, which was not corrected inspite of the recommendation of the Executive Engineer and as such, the complainant did not pay anything towards discharge of his bills.
-
The appellant, who were O.Ps. there contested the case by filing written statement with this averment that father of the complainant was a consumer for commercial connection and was consuming electrical energy in the shop of the complainant, whose consumer No. was AMP 10 CS 2. It was also contended that the complainant is a resident of urban area and the electric supply was being effected from urban area feeder and according to tariff of the Bihar State Electricity...
To continue reading
Request your trial