DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, DARJEELING
24, M.C. Road, Chotta kak Jhora, Darjeeling
P.O & Dist. Darjeeling Pin-734101.
PRESIDENT : SRI DEBASIS MUKHOPADHYAY
MEMBER : SHRI PRADIP KUMAR SIDDHANTA
Consumer Complaint No: C. C. No 2/18
Mrs.Namsey,
Resident of TAGSTER HOUSE,
8TH Mile, P.O & P.S. Kalimpong, Dist-Kalimpong.
Pin code-734301.
…………………………………….Complainant.
V.E.R.S.U.S.
- The Divisional Manager,
Kalimpong Distribution Division, WBSEDCL,
SIGATSE HOUSE,Warling Golai, Kalimpong-734301.
- Assistant Manager,
WBSEDCL,
KALIMPONG Customer Care Centre,
10th Mile, Kalimpong,
P.O & P.S and Dist. Kalimpong-734101.
......................................O.P(s)
For the Complainant : Ms. Sharda Darnal
………………………………………..(Advocate)
For the O.P : Shri P.C. Khati, Miss Prerna Pradhan
………………………………………..(Advocate)
Date of Filing : 20.03.2018
Date of Disposal : 04.10.2018
Time Taken : 199 Days
-2-
C.C No. 2/18
JUDGEMENT
This is a case u/s 12 of the C.P . Act, 1986. filed by the complainant Mrs. Namsey of Tagster House, 8th Mile, Kalimpong , P.O & P.S , and Distt. Kalimpong against the Divisional Manager and Assistant Manager, W.B.S.E.D.C.L., Kalimpong, praying for injunction restraining the opposite parties from disconnection of petitioners electric lines regarding Consumer I.D No. 412157433 and 412160908 and compensation and other reliefs.
The brief fact of the case are as follows :
The complainant stated that she was a consumer of electricity regarding Consumer I.D No. 412160908 and 412157433 under the WBSEDCL , Kalimpong and she has been paying her electric bills regularly. In February 2008 some persons from the electricity board had come to the petitioners premises and demanded electric bill amount payable in respect of Consumer I.D. No. 412157442 which stood in the name of Chotela . The employees of the O.P had threatened that unless the payment be made they will disconnect the electric lines of the petitioners .
Then the petitioner sent a notice through her lawyer and receiving the said notice The Assistant Engineer had sent the guiding reply stating that the petitioner must pay the outstanding dues against the Consumer I.D -412157442 amounting Rs. 62,681.49/- or otherwise the petitioners existing live connections may be discontinued .
The petitioner stated that the said electric meter of Consumer No. 412157442 did not belong to her and she was in no way connected with the said meter and therefore, she was not in a position to pay the bill and she has no obligation to pay the said outstanding dues regarding Consumer I.D. No. 412157442.
The petitioner/complainant was compelled to file this complaint against the O.Ps as otherwise the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury if the electric meters standing in her name are disconnected illegally.
Hence the petitioner prayed for injunction restraining the O.Ps from disconnection of electric lines regarding Consumer I.D. No. 412157433 and 412160908 and for compensation and costs and for other reliefs.
-3-
C.C No. 2/18
JUDGEMENT
The O.Ps appeared to contest the case and submitted their written version
The O.Ps contended that , there were 4 (four) nos .of electric meter installed at the premises of the complainant known as Tagster House. The meters are in the names of :
- Mrs Namsey ( Commercial Consumer I.D No. 412160908).
- Namsey (Domestic Consumer I.D No. 412157433).
- Namsey ( Domestic Consumer I.D No. 412157436).
- Chotela , c/o Mrs Namsey ( Domestic Consumer I.D No. 412157442)
The O.Ps stated that, it was ascertained by the O.Ps that the Domestic Consumer I.D No. 412157442 stood in the name of one Chotela who is a domestic servant of the complainant and therefore the contention of the complainant that she was consumer of only two service connections was not true.
The O.Ps further stated that the said Consumer I.D No. 412157442 was disconnected due to non-payment of bill periods commencing from April , 2008 to July, 2011 having outstanding bills of Rs. 31,545/- and from August, 2011 to December, 2014 having outstanding amount of Rs. 31136.49/- , totaling a sum of Rs. 62,681.49/- .
As the complainant was not paying the said bills in spite of repeated demands made by the O.Ps , as such , the said connection was disconnected from 13.11.2013.The O.Ps contended that , the officials even offered the complainant easy installments to pay the amount but the complainant failed and neglected to pay , and O.Ps are still willing to offer easy installments and the O.Ps also offered remission of Rs. 31,545/- for the bill for agitation period of April 2008 to July 2011, till a decision passed by the appropriate authority and the complainant is required to pay a sum of Rs. 31,134.49/- for the period from January 2012 to March 2012 , and July 2012 to September 2014.
Hence , the O.Ps prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
The complainant filed some document namely:
- Copies of electric bills in respect of Consumer I.D Nos. 412160908 and 412157433 and 412157442.
- Xerox copies of notice , dated 07.03.2018.
- And letter dated 13.03.2018 from the Assistant Engineer.
The O.Ps did not file any document .
-4-
C.C No. 2/18
JUDGEMENT
The complainant submitted examination-in-chief by affidavit .
Both parties filed written arguments in-respect of the respective submissions.
From the contention of the parties, it appears that the points for consideration in this case are:
- Whether the complainant has any obligation to pay the electric bills in the name of Mr. Chotela , Consumer I.D No. 412157442.
- Whether the demand of the O.P from the complainant regarding the Consumer I.D No. 412157442 is proper and legal or not .
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief of injunction as prayed for .
- Whether the complainant is entitled to any other relief in this case.
DECISION WITH REASONS:
The Learned Advocate for the complainant submitted that the complainant had no connection with the disputed meter and she had no obligation to pay any amount due in respect of any meter belonging to other person and for the outstanding dues in respect of other person’s electric consumptions . The complainant’s electricity connections cannot be disconnected. It is also submitted that the act of the O.Ps is completely illegal and therefore the complainant was entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
-5-
C.C No. 2/18
JUDGEMENT
The Learned Advocate for the O.Ps submitted that the disputed meter was actually belonging to the complainant and was just in the name of the domestic servant and therefore the complainant must have the obligation to pay the outstanding dues and he prayed for dismissal of the case.
We have carefully considered the respective contentions of the parties as made out in the complaint., the written version, the evidence and the written arguments of both sides. It is admitted fact that disputed meter No. 412157442 was in the name of one Mr. Chotella and not in the name of the complainant. The said meter was also admitted to have been disconnected on and from 13.11.2013. The O.Ps contended that the said Mr. Chotella was the domestic servant of the complainant but the complainant denied this. The O.Ps could not place any material to prove that the person named Mr. chotella was the domestic servant of the complainant or that the consumption of electricity in the said disputed meter was actually made by the complainant.
Since the disputed meter admittedly belonged to another person named Mr. chotella we find that the O.Ps cannot legally make any demand of the outstanding dues of that meter from the complainant. Even if the O.Ps contention that Mr. chotella was domestic servant of the complainant then also the O.Ps have no right to claim the amount of outstanding dues for the complainant since legally the complainant cannot have any obligation to pay for the dues of her domestic servant. But the fact remains that the O.Ps failed to prove their contention. It is also not denied by the O.Ps that the complainant has been paying all her meter consumption charges regarding her electric meter nos.412130908 and 412157433.
Since the complainant has been paying all the lawful changes in respect of her meter nos 412130908 and 412157433, therefore, the O.ps have no right to disconnect the complainant’s meter no 412130908 and 412157433 so long as she pays all the lawful charges in respect of her said electric meters. The O.Ps act of threat of disconnection of the said two meters is an unlawful invasion over the complainant’s right to enjoy electricity by paying lawful charges.
Therefore, the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for and the O.Ps are required to be restrained from disconnecting the complainant’s electric meters no 412130908 and 412157433 so long as the complainant pays all lawful charges in respect of her said two meters and follow all rules and regulations of enjoyment of electricity.
Accordingly the points for consideration are all decided in favor of the complainant and against the O.ps.
The case succeeds as against the O.Ps .
-6-
C.C No. 2/18
JUDGEMENT
Hence, it is,
O.R.D.E.R.E.D.
That the case is allowed on contest against the O.P with cost of Rs. 1000/- .
The O.Ps are restrained from disconnecting the complainant’s meter Consumer Id numbers 412130908 and 412157433, so long as the complainant pays t the electric charges and follows the rules of supply of electricity.
The O.Ps are also to pay compensation of Rs . 2000/- for harassment made to her by the O.Ps.
The decretal dues are to be paid within 3 ( three) months from this date.
Let copies of the order be supplied free of cost to the parties under the provision of Order 5, Rule 10 of W.B.C.P. Rules , 1987.
