District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Dakshin Dinajpur, W. Bengal
(Old Sub-Jail Municipal Market Complex, 2nd Floor, Balurghat Dakshin Dinajpur Pin - 733101)
Telefax: (03522)-270013
Present
Shri Sambhunath Chatterjee - President
Miss. Swapna Saha - Member
Shri Siddhartha Ganguli - Member
Consumer Complaint No. 7/2015
Gopal Mandal
S/o Late Gobinda Nath Mandal
Vill.: Mangalpur (Subhash Corner)
PO: Beltalapark, P.S.: Balurghat,
Mobile No. 9434373949
Dist. Dakshin Dinajpur …………………Complainant(s)
V-E-R-S-U-S
1. A. E. & Station Manager,
Balurghat Customer Care Centre,
W.B.S.E.D.C.L.,
PO: Beltalapark, PS: Balurghat
Dist.: Dakshin Dinajpur.
2. Assistant Manager (P & A),
Dakshin Dinajpur (D) Division,
W.B.S.E.D.C.L.,
PO & PS: Balurghat
Dist.: Dakshin Dinajpur.
3. Divisional Engineer & Division Manager,
Dakshin Dinajpur (D) Division,
W.B.S.E.D.C.L.,
PO: Beltalapark , PS: Balurghat
Dist.: Dakshin Dinajpur. …………………Opposite Party / Parties
Ld. Advocate(s):
For complainant ……………… - Shri Bidyut Kr. Roy & Avijit Roy
For OP Nos.1, 2 & 3 ……………… - Shri Sudip Chatterjee
Date of Filing : 21.01.2015
Date of Disposal : 08.12.2015
Contd…P/2
Judgment & Order dt. 08.12.2015
Fact of the case in brief is that the complainant is a bona fide consumer of W.B.S.E.D.C.L. being Consumer ID No. 400214563, the complainant was all along paying electric bill. The meter of the complainant was found defective on 12.7.2014 which can be found from the endorsement in the yellow card of the complainant as defective and before the said date the meter reading was recorded on 14.3.2014 mentioning the consumption unit as 2449 in the yellow card and lastly the said meter replaced by a new meter No. L3576411 on 11.8.2014.
The complainant paid last bill up to 2449 units and he is liable to pay the bill for the unit 2487 – 2449 = 38 units. All on a sudden the OPs sent a bill dated 24.7.2014 for the month of July to September, 2014 of Rs.5265/- against the 317 units which is not corrected. The OPs sent another bill dated 25.11.2014 for the months of October to December, 2014 showing the meter reading as 3448 units with allegedly consumed by the complainant of 182 units and the bill amount was Rs.1821/- which is fictitious one.
In view of the said fact that the complainant has prayed for setting aside the claim of the bill by the OPs and also prayed for necessary permission be given to the complainant for payment of the actual consumption of units. Apart from the said fact that the complainant also prayed for compensation of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.14,000/- towards damage.
OPs contested the case by filing a written version denying all the material allegations made by the complainant in his complaint. It was specifically stated that the old meter of the complainant was found defective at the time of taking meter reading and when it came to the knowledge of the OP men by following provision of Regulation 3.1.8 an
Contd…P/3
average bill was generated in the name of the complainant, as system generated process the said bill was prepared as per average bill of the same period of the previous year which was consumed by the complainant.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the case.
On the basis of the pleadings of the respective parties following points are to be decided :-
- Whether the meter was found defective?
- Whether the bill generated by the OPs was prepared as the Regulation 3.1.8?
- Whether the complainant is liable to pay the amount on the basis of average consumption made by him during the previous year of the same period?
- Whether any excessive amount was charged by the OPs?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get relief as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
All the points are taken together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. Lawyer for the complainant submitted that the complainant paid electric bill to the OPs prior to 12.7.2014, since the meter was found defective, the complainant informed the OPs regarding the defective of the said meter. It was emphasized by the Ld. Lawyer for the complainant that before detection of the defective meter the meter reading was found the consumption was made by the complainant of 2449 units, which was reflected in the yellow card and reading was taken on 14.3.2014. The complainant paid the bill of 2449 units and after replacement the consumption was shown 2487 units i.e. the complainant enjoyed consumption of electricity of 32 units but all on a
Contd…P/4
sudden, the OPs sent a bill dated 24.7.2014 for the months of July to September, 2014 of Rs. 5265/- against 817 units which is fictitious and the complainant is not liable to pay the said bill. The Ld. Lawyer brought to our notice that the OPs sent another bill dated 25.11.2014 for the months of October to December, 2014, showing present reading as 3448 units as consumed units and the claim amount of Rs.1821/- along with outstanding amount of Rs.5266/-.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the above case Ld. Lawyer argued that since illegality was committed by the OPs, therefore, the bill amount claimed by the OPs be set aside and a fresh bill is to be sent after asking the OPs to rectify the bill so that the complainant can pay the said bill amount in equal installment.
Ld. Lawyer for the OPs argued that the complainant paid bill in respect of consumption of 2449 units and since the defective meter was found and the replacement was made immediately after detection of the defective meter. The bill for the said transition period was sent on the basis of the units enjoyed by the complainant during the previous year for the same period as per the provision of Regulation 3.1.8 of average bill was generated in the name of the complainant as system generated process of the said bill was prepared accordingly.
There was no illegality in calculating the amount which was claimed by the OPs in the complaint. So far as the consumption of electricity is concerned, the complainant has claimed that he enjoyed 32 units for the last 7 months which is not at all feasible since the office record as well as the bill paid by the complainant clearly proves that during the said period of the previous year the consumption made by the complainant was of 2643 units and accordingly the bill was prepared. It was also emphasized by the Ld. Lawyer for the OPs that since the complainant did not pay bill subsequently as the OPs cannot
Contd…P/5
accept the subsequent bill without clearing the outstanding bill amount
thereby the bill amount of Rs.1821/- for the consumption of 182 units was demanded from the complainant along with outstanding dues of Rs.5266/-
Considering all these aspects the OPs did not commit any illegality and this Forum should give necessary direction upon the complainant for payment of the amount after applying discretion of installment, if this Ld. Forum thinks fit and proper.
Considering the submission of the respective parties on the perusal of materials on record it is an admitted fact that the complainant’s meter became defective and it was brought to the notice of the OPs and subsequently the meter was replaced. Since during the transition period no bill was generated and accordingly as per regulation of 3.1.8 the average bill was prepared on the basis of consumption made by the complainant during the same period of previous year, which was paid by the complainant to the OPs in response to the bill sent to the complainant of the previous year and no objection was raised by the complainant at that time regarding the electricity consumed by the complainant during that period.
It is an admitted fact that the complainant though claimed 38 units but actually the said consumption was claimed by him has got no basis since from the units consumed by the complainant was much more during the previous months of the complainant while the meter was in good condition the consumption was recorded properly and the complainant paid bill without raising any objection. Considering the said backdrop of the case we hold that the bill generated by the OPs on the basis of the Regulation 3.1.8 was system generated process and bill was accordingly prepared and since the complainant failed to pay that amount within due date the amount claimed by the OPs to the tune of
Contd…P/6
Rs.5265/- was correctly claimed by the OPs from the complainant. There was no illegality in claiming the amount from the complainant on the basis of fictitious claim as alleged by the complainant.
It is also admitted fact that subsequently units consumed by the complainant and the bill prepared by the OPs was not accepted due to not clearing of the outstanding amount therefore, the complainant is liable to pay the said outstanding amount along with subsequent amount to the OPs and the claim made by the OPs in respect of outstanding amount as well as subsequent consumption units enjoyed by the complainant and the bill claimed by the OPs was not a fictitious one. The complainant is liable to pay the arrear bill accordingly.
Since the complainant’s Ld. Lawyer claimed that the easy installment can be given to the complainant for liquidating the bill amount, the same may be considered by us. Accordingly, we hold that the complainant will not be entitled to get any relief as prayed for.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
that the instant petition of complaint CC No.7/2015 is dismissed on contest without any cost.
The complainant is directed to pay the arrear bill amount of Rs.5266/- + Rs.1821/- = 7087/- in 6 (six) equal installment and the last installment is to be paid to the tune of Rs.1,008/- to liquidate the entire amount. The first of such installment is to be paid within 15 day of this month and to go on paying rest installment within 15th of each succeeding months. The complainant is also directed to pay the current bill amount as per bill that will be sent the OPs.
Contd…P/7
Let a plain copy of this order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost.
Dictated & corrected
………….….…….
(S. N. Chatterjee)
President
We concur,
………….….……. ………….….…….
(S. Saha) (S. Ganguli)
Member Member
- Date when free copy was issued ……………………
- Date of application for certified copy ……………………
- Date when copy was made ready ……………………
- Date of delivery ……………………
FREE COPY [Reg. 18(6)]
- Mode of dispatch ……………………
- Date of dispatch ……………………
-x-
