MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. MADHAV NARAYAN TALE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Shri Panchal, the learned advocate for appellant and respondent in person. It has been conclusively proved that Rs. 138.05 has been paid by complainant on 15-9-1992 and the M.S.E.B. has passed the receipt No. 5995674, therefore, the disconnection of electric supply subsequently on 27-9-1992 is not justified. It is very apparent that complainants electric supply was disconnected after he paid the bill on 15-9-1992. It is also a fact that Rs. 63.16 was included in the bill of Rs. 138.05. By the impugned order, the M.S.E.B. has been directed to remove the deficiency in the service by restoring complainants electric supply and award Rs. 100/- per day towards compensation from the date of order till the electric supply restored. The M.S.E.B. contended in this appeal that although the complainant paid the bill of Rs. 138.05 on 15-9-1992 in absence of correct information from the Bank, the complainants electric line came to be disconnected on 29-9-1992 and not on 27-8-1992 as alleged. In any case, the difference of two dates does not cause any change in the deficency in the service of M.S.E.B. In this appeal, the grievance made by the M.S.E.B. is that the complainant did not paid the bills regularly in respect of consumption of electricity and therefore the M.S.E.B. had to take action of disconnection of electric line. In any case, in our view that it is not minimised the deficiency in the service of the M.S.E.B.

(2.) It is contended by Shri Panchal that the order of District Forum, directing the M.S.E.B. to pay Rs. 100/- per day towards compensation is unjust and illegal. There is substance in the submission of Shri Panchal, in as much as the amount of Rs. 100/- per day towards compensation appears to be harsh. After all, from the bill of complainant was of Rs. 138.05. It appears that there is minimum consumption of electricity since the complainant is alleged to have been residing at Amaravati and not at his village. In any case, the grant of amount of Rs. 100/- per day is not justified. From the facts and circumstances of this case, in our view it would meet the ends of justice if the total amount of Rs. 500/- is granted to him towards compensation as against the grant of Rs. 100/- per day towards compensation. Hence, we pass the following order :

(3.) Appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining the order of District Forum, Amravati, we would like to modify the aforesaid order of District Forum about the payment of compensation. Instead of award of the amount of Rs. 100/- towards compensation to complainant we quantify the total amount of Rs. 500/- towards compensation and the opposite party viz. M.S.E.B. shall pay Rs. 500/- towards compensation to complainant. The respondent also be paid Rs. 500/- as costs of this appeal. Appeal partly allowed.