S.C. Vyas, President—This is an appeal by Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board, feeling aggrieved by order dated 23.5.2008, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called “District Forum for short) in Complaint Case No.155/2006, directing the Electricity Board to issue a new bill of consumption of February, 2006 regarding 246 units to the complainant. Appellant was also directed to pay cost of litigation Rs.500/ and, compensation Rs.2,000/- for mental harassment.

2. Undisputed facts of the case are that respondent/complainant was having a premises at Balaji Nagar, Khamtarai, and electricity connection was provided by the appellant to him in that premises having Service No.1000070434. Regular bills were issued in his name and, were continuously paid by him. In the month of February, 2006 though the consumption was only of 246 units, but the bill was issued for Rs.60,362 saying that Rs.56,078 were arrears. Later on when complaint was filed, then it was clarified by the appellant that one Mr. Jena was residing in that house earlier as tenant, and to that person also electricity supply was provided on Service No.452987. He left Rs.56,078 due on that electricity connection. Later on the respondent occupied the same premises, then being the amount due on the same premises, it was included in his bill.

3. Learned District Forum after considering the material produced before it, ultimately allowed the complaint and, directed as stated hereinabove in para 1.

4. After hearing arguments advanced by both parties and perusing the record of District Forum, we are of the opinion that this appeal has got no force and, is liable to be dismissed.

5. The record shows that respondent/complainant Mr. M. Narayan Rao purchased a house by registered document on 26.4.2002. Some of the bills issued by Electricity Board, which have been placed on record shows that earlier it was never informed by the appellant to respondent that any amount is due against anyone, who was occupying that premises. The bill of October, 2005 payable in November, bill of November, 2005 payable in December and bill of December, 2005 payable in January, 2006 are on record and there is no mention regarding arrears, in these bills. Even in bill of January, 2006, there appears no such mention. All of a sudden without giving any details in bill for the month of February, 2006 in column of connection/disconnection adjustment Rs. 59,702/-, have been shown as arrears and, this amount was included in the amount of bill. It appears that the amount had become time barred being due for more than 3 years, because in the year 2002, the house was purchased by the complainant, and if at all that fellow against whom, there were certain amount due, was residing in the premises, then his occupation must be in some year prior to 2002. If there were certain arrears, then, such arrears could have been recovered only upto year 2005. After that proceedings for its recovery become time barred. It appears that because time has barred, the remedy for recovery against the original consumer of service No.452987, therefore the Officers of Electricity Board in their wisdom have decided to include that amount in the consumption bill of respondent/complainant, who was neither responsible for payment of this amount nor consumed electricity in respect of this amount.

6. The said person Mr. Jena was neither tenant of complainant/respondent, nor he was indulged in possession by the present complainant/respondent in any capacity in that premise. If he was tenant of any previous owner, and left the same, then no law permits Electricity Board to recover such amount from the present respondent. In these circumstances, when learned District Forum has directed to issue bill of actual consumption only, then no fault can be found in such direction. The direction appears perfectly alright and are affirmed. Therefore, this appeal has no force and, is dismissed with cost of Rs.500/-, to be