Fact of the case in short is that this Complainant is the Consumer having Consumer No.232130739 and Installation No.964396 under the O.P. and getting electricity to his premises by virtue of this service connection.
Thereafter, all on a sudden this O.P. demanded Rs.28,336/- from this Complainant for Consumption of 3306 units of electricity in his Service Connection by sending electric bill asking him to pay the same within the period as mentioned in the bill.
Thereafter, this Complainant submitted application for correction of the said bills ; but O.P. did not pay any heeds.
It is further case of the Complainant that on 02-06-2016 the meter reader checked the meter and found that the case electric meter is not functioning properly.
Thereafter, employee of the O.P. came and installed the new meter under case service connection. This Complainant never consumed 3306 units in three (3) months and usually his consumption is within 500 units during three months.
This O.P. did not pay any heeds to rectify the impugned electric bill. So, this Complainant has filed this case for making direction upon the O.P. to rectify the electric bill in question and also prays for Rs.35,000/- as Compensation and Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost.
The notice of this case was served upon the O.P. but O.P. did not appear. So, this case was heard exparte.
Decision with reasons.
Perused the petition of complaint and the copy of electric bills and the application submitted to O.P. by the Complainant for correction of impugned electric bill.
This case is being conducted by Complainant in person who submitted inter alia that he never consumed more than 500 units in three months but ; this O.P. has sent the impugned bills showing consumption of 3306 units in three months. So, he made objection and made prayer for correction of the said bill but ; O.P. did not pay any heed.
We also find that meter of case service connection was out of order, so said meter was replaced by new meter when previous meter was examined by employee, meter reader on 02-06-2016.
In this case we find that exhibit – 1 is the impugned bill.
It appears from exhibit – 1 that 3306 units have been incorporated as consumption of unit by Complainant in the month of June, July and August – 2016 and claimed Rs.28,336/- as consumption of electric charge ; but we found from exhibit – 1 (a) that this Complainant consumed 548 units during the month December, January and February – 2016.
It also reveals from exhibit – 1(b),(c) & (d) that this Complainant’s consumed 617 units in the month of September, October & November – 2015 and 478 units during the month of June, July & August – 2015.
This O.P. has not come to justify that the basis of estimation of consumption of unit made in the impugned bill is correct.
So, we find that the allegation made by the Complainant that the claimed made in the impugned bill of exhibit – 1 to the extent of Rs.28,336/- showing consumption of 3306 units during the month of June, July and August – 2016 is inflated, exaggerated is remained unchallenged.
Moreover, Complainant has been able to prove his claim by submitting previous electric bills that he never consumed 3306 units in three months previously.
In view of the circumstances we have sufficient reason to believe that the assessment of consumption of electricity to the extent of 3306 units during the month of June, July & August – 2016 is arbitrarily, excessive and exaggerated without any basis. Moreover, it is admitted by Complainant that electric meter of case service connection is defective. This matter is also remained unchallenged.
In view of above facts & circumstances we have sufficient reason to believe that estimation of consumption of 3306 units in the month of June, July & August – 2016 is without any legal basis and arbitrary.
So the assessment of consumption units in the impugned bills is should be declared as void, arbitrary & exaggerated,
In view of the above facts & circumstance we are of the opinion that if the O.P. is directed to prepare electric bill afresh for the disputed months on the basis of average consumption of previous or corresponding three months whichever is highest in view of observation of Hon’ble High Court reported in AIR 2002 JHAR 123 then none would be prejudiced.
In this ca se we also do not like to impose any cost of litigation or compensation upon the O.P./ Station Manager, W.B.S.E.D.C.L. in view of observation of Hon’ble N.C.D.R.C. reported in 2015(1) CPR page 57(N.C) as O.P. is a Govt. undertaking concerned.
In the result the case succeeds.
Hence, it is
Ordered
That the Complaint Case no.46 of 2016 be and same is hereby allowed on exparte against O.P. A E / S M, WBSEDCL, Schooldanga C.C.C., Junbedia More, Bankura; but without cost.
The bill in question for the month of June, July & August – 2016 (Exhibit – 1) is hereby declared as void, arbitrary, exaggerated, excessive and without any legal basis.
Just – 2016 on the basis of average consumption of electricity according to meter recording for the corresponding three months of previous year consumption or on the basis of average consumption of previous three months from the date of the case meter being out of order, within three months from the date of receipt of copy of Judgement and to serve the same upon Complainant asking him to pay the same within two-months from the date of receipt of said bill ; if the Complainant fails to pay the same within the period as stated above then O.P. is at liberty to proceed in this regard according to law.
O.P. is also at liberty to go on claiming / demanding electric charges for current months as per consumption of electricity according to meter recording of the case service connection.
This Complainant is dismissed in respect of other prayer made by the Complainant.
Let plain copy of this Judgement be given to the Complainant free of cost and another copy of Judgement be also send by registered post with A/D to the O.P. for compliance.
