State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Bhagwati Prasad vs Mpmkvvco.Ltd. on 15 May, 2023
M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
PLOT NO. 76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL (M.P.)
FA No. 596 / 2017.
Bhagwati Prasad Shastri,
s/o Shri Brijkishore Sharma,
R/p Bharat Medical Store,
Tilak Chowk, Vidisha (M.P.). .... APPELLANT.
Versus
Executive Engineer,
M.P.M.K.V.V. Co. Ltd., Vidisha (NM.P.). .... RESPONDENT.
As per Shri Justice Shantanu Kemkar, (oral) :
Date of ORDER Order 15.05.2023 Shri Satish Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Aman Gupta, learned counsel appears for Ms. Sapna Aggarwal, learned counsel for the respondent.
Heard.
This appeal arises out of the order dated 26.9.2016 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Vidisha (for short the 'District Commission') in CC No.93 /2015 whereby the District Commission has dismissed the complaint filed by the appellant / complainant.
2. On going through the record we find that the grievance of the appellant / complainant was that the electricity connection obtained by him for his Medical Store was not giving the correct reading and it was running fast and due to which he was getting the bills for exorbitant amount by showing consumption more than the actual consumption of the electricity
- 2- connection. In reply the respondent - opposite party had stated that after receipt of the application with the prescribed fees of Rs.50/- immediately the meter was tested and since it was found to be defective, the bills were corrected and the same were appropriately scaled down. It is stated that fresh bills were issued by reducing the units of consumption.
3. Considering the aforesaid fact the District Commission took a view that since immediately on submitting the application with prescribed fees of Rs.50/- for getting the meter checked the respondent / opposite party had promptly acted upon it and on noticing the meter to be defective reduced the charges levied upon the appellant, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. Accordingly, it had dismissed the complaint.
4. We find no error in the view taken by the District Commission as after the payment of requisite fees with application the respondent / opposite party has immediately acted upon it and on finding the meter defective had reduced the bills and issued fresh bills as per the corrected meter reading. Therefore no case for interference in the impugned order is made out.
5. In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.
(Justice Shantanu Kemkar) (Dr. Monika Malik)
PRESIDENT MEMBER
Phadke