Consumer Complaint No.113 of 2015
Date of filing: 11.5.2015 Date of disposal: 11.8.2016
Complainant: Jaharlal Karmakar, S/o. Late Basanta Karmakar, Village: Kerili, PO: Masagram, PS: Jamalpur, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 401.
-V E R S U S-
Opposite Party: 1. Jamalpur Group Electric Supply, A unit of West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd., represented through its Station Manager, Jamalpur C.C. Centre, having its office at Vill. & PO: Jamalpur, PS; Jamalpur, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 408.
2. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd., represented through its Secretary, Bidyut Bhaban, Block –DJ, Salt Lake City, Kolkata – 700 091.
Present: Hon’ble President: Sri Asoke Kumar Mandal.
Hon’ble Member: Smt. Silpi Majumder.
Hon’ble Member: Sri Pankaj Kumar Sinha.
Appeared for the Complainant: Ld. Advocate, Suvro Chakraborty.
Appeared for the Opposite Party (s): Ld. Advocate, Biswanath Nag.
J U D G E M E N T
This complaint is filed by the Complainant u/S. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alleging deficiency in service, as well as, unfair trade practice against the OPs as the OPs have arbitrarily obtained a sum of Rs.100=00 towards disconnection and reconnection charges from him.
The brief fact of the case of the Complainant is that being a domestic consumer of the OPs he used to make payment of the electricity bills issued by the OPs regularly. The OP-1 sent a bill to the Complainant for the months of December 2014, January 2015 and February 2015 respectively. In respect of the said bill he paid a sum of Rs.1000=00 firstly on 05.01.2015 to the OP-1 and the OP-1 issued a money receipt in favour of him. At the time of receipt of the said amount the OP-1 told him that if the Complainant will pay the remaining amount within due date as mentioned in the bill i.e. 19.02.2015, then no amount of fine will be required. The Complainant on 05.02.2015 again went to the office of the OP-1 for making payment of the remaining amount of Rs.909=00, then the OP-1 told him for making payment of Rs.899=00 as round figure. Then the Complainant paid the said amount to the OP-1 and OP-1 issued money receipt in his name. But very surprisingly the OP-1 issued another money receipt amounting to Rs.100/- for disconnection and reconnection charge and illegally and forcefully took the same from him. When the Complainant sought for explanation for the same, the OP-1 asked him to contact with the Station Manager and after consulting with the Station Manager the Complainant submitted a written representation before him on 05.02.2015 and 11.02.2015 and the OP-1 had received the same accordingly. Inspite of receiving the written representation from him on two occasions the OP-1 had neither taken any step for removing such fault nor bother to refund the excess amount of Rs.100=00 to him, which is an example of deficiency in service, as well as, unfair trade practice on behalf of the OPs and for such act the Complainant had to suffer mental agony and pain for which the OPs are liable to compensate the same by making payment of adequate compensation. As his grievance had not been redressed by the OPs before coming to this Ld. Forum, hence having no alternative he has approached before this Ld. Forum by filing this complaint praying for direction upon the OPs for making payment of compensation to the tune of Rs.10, 000=00 due to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and Rs.5, 000=00 for mental pain, agony and harassment to him.
The petition of complaint have been contested by the OPs by filing written version contending that since installation of the electric service connection the OP-1 used to issue electric bills as per actual consumption upon the Complainant and accordingly as per meter reading for the period from December 2014 to February 2015 bill was raised showing due dates as 22.12.2014, 20.01.2015 and 19.02.2015. But the Complainant upon receipt of the said bill did not pay the stipulated amount within due date i.e.22.12.2014 and as the same has not been paid within due date as per system generated notice u/S. 56(1) of the Electricity Act has been issued. Thereafter the Complainant on 05.01.2015 has paid a sum of Rs.1000=00 out of total billed amount and thereafter on 05.02.2015 the Complainant has paid Rs.899=00 and on that day as the notice u/S. 56(1) of the Electricity Act has already been issued an amount of Rs.100=00 for disconnection and reconnection charge has also been received by the OP-1, which is legal and justified and the Complainant knowing everything just to harass the OPs filed the instant complaint which is liable to be dismissed with cost. The Ops have further mentioned that in view of the provision of the Section 42(5) of the Electricity act, 2003 and the Rules and Regulations framed thereunder if there is any grievance against any bill or its payment mode thereof that should be ventilated before the Regulatory Commission or before the person or authority empowered by the said Act and as such having an alternative and appropriate Forum this Ld. Forum has no jurisdiction to try with the instant complaint. Accordingly the Ops have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
The Complainant has adduced evidence on affidavit along with several documents in support of his contention. The OPs have filed written notes of argument and the Ops have also placed their reliance on the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in (2007) 0 Supreme (SC) 1061.
We have carefully perused the entire record along with documents filed by the contesting parties, written notes of argument; Ruling filed by the OPs and heard argument advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the contesting parties at length.
It is seen by us that in the instant complaint the grievance of the Complainant is revolving within a very short compass i.e. the OP-1 had arbitrarily obtained a sum of Rs.100=00 from him due to disconnection and reconnection charge where there is no question of disconnection of the electric service connection by the OPs and therefore reconnection does not arise at all. According to the Complainant such action of the OPs can easily be termed as deficiency in service, as well as, unfair trade practice on behalf of the OPs.
We have noticed that the Complainant got an electric bill for the month of December 2014, January 2015 and February 2015, whereby the Complainant was directed for making payment of the billed amount within due dates. The Schedule dates for making payment were mentioned as 22.12.2014, 20.01.2015 and 19.02.2015. The amount was mentioned as Rs.659=00, Rs.625=00 and Rs.625=00 (within due dates) and Rs.665=00, Rs.631=00 and Rs.631=00 (after due dates). It is evident from the copy of the said bill that in case of non-payment of the amount within due dates as mentioned the consumer will not get any rebate at the time of making payment and otherwise he will be entertained for rebate. Admittedly the Complainant has failed to make payment of the billed amount for the month of December 2014 within the due date as specified in the bill and he went at the OP-1 for making payment of the amount for the month of December, 2014 on 05.01.2015 though the due date was on or within 22.12.2014 from the date of received of the bill. The questioned spot bill was issued by the OPs and received by the Complainant on 11.12.2014. It is an admitted fact that on 05.01.2015 the Complainant paid Rs.1000=00 towards the billed amount and upon received the same the OP-1 issued a money receipt to the Complainant. In this respect we are to say that why the Complainant paid Rs.1000=00 on 05.01.2015 in respect of the bill amount of Rs.659=00 or Rs.665=00 whatever it may be and how the OP-1 received the same and under which head and capacity. It is clearly mentioned that in case of failing to make payment of the billed amount within due date extra amount should be paid. The extra amount has also been mentioned by the OP-1. It is also true that the Complainant paid Rs.1000=00 to the OP-1 and there is no evidence that the OP-1 had created pressure on him. Therefore now the Complainant cannot take such plea that without taking the extra amount towards fine/late payment charge as mentioned in the bill, the OP-1 took a big amount from him. In our view if there is any laches or fault, the same had equally been contributed by the Complainant and the OP-1. Now by filing this complaint the Complainant cannot put such laches on the shoulder of the OPs. Though the Complainant has mentioned that he was told by the OP-1 that in case of payment of the remaining bill amount within due date i.e. 19.02.2015, then payment of fine will not be required. In this respect we are of the view that in support of such pleadings no evidence is adduced by the Complainant to corroborate the same. Therefore such pleadings cannot stand at all. On 05.02.2015 the Complainant again went at the office of the OP-1 for making payment of the remaining amount of Rs.909=00. On that date the OP-1 by issuing one money receipt directed the Complainant for making payment of further amount of Rs.100=00 towards reconnection and disconnection charge along with the remaining bill amount. Admittedly at that time the Complainant paid the remaining bill amount along with Rs.100=00 as reconnection and disconnection charge, but subsequently he made written correspondence with the Station Manager, but no fruitful result yielded. According to the Complainant the said amount of Rs.100=00 was claimed and collected by the OP-1 forcefully, illegally and arbitrarily because as no disconnection was made by the OPs, the question of reconnection does not arise at all. In this respect the contention the OPs is that the said amount of Rs.100=00 was taken legally, properly and as per the Electricity Act, 2003 because as the Complainant had failed to make payment of the first amount one system generated notice was issued in the name of the Complainant u/S. 56(1) of the Electricity Act, 2003. According to the OPs as there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their behalf, question for making payment of compensation does not arise. The Section 56(1) of the Electricity Act, 2003 reveals that-
56(1) Where any person neglects to pay any charge for electricity or any sum other than a charge for electricity due from him to a licensee or the generating company in respect of supply, transmission or distribution or wheeling of electricity to him, the licensee or the generating company may, after giving not less than fifteen clear days’ notice in writing, to such person and without prejudice to his rights to recover such charge or other sum by suit, cut off the supply of electricity and for that purpose cut or disconnect any electric supply line or other works being the property of such licensee or the generating company through which electricity may have been supplied, transmitted, distributed or wheeled and may discontinue the supply until such charge or other sum, together with any expenses incurred by him in cutting off and reconnecting the supply, are paid………………………………………
In the above-mentioned Section there is mentioning of ‘non-payment of any charge for electricity’, if we put much emphasis on these word, hence in our view in the instant complaint no occasion arose for non-payment of any charge for electricity by the Complainant as the Complainant paid a sum of Rs.1000=00 on 05.01.2015 against bill amount of Rs.659=00 or Rs.665=00 whatever it may be. As excess amount was paid by the complainant and same was duly received by the OP-1, what prompted the OP-1 to issue system generated notice upon the Complainant u/S. 56(1) of the Electricity Act, 2003, the picture has not been cleared by the OPs. Moreover whether any notice u/S. 56(1) of the Electricity Act, 2003 was at all generated and the same was duly received by the Complainant or not, no evidence is adduced by the OPs. This is not a case either from the Complainant or the OPs that electric service connection of the Complainant was disconnected by the OPs due to non-payment of electric bill. Therefore in our considered view the OPs cannot obtain Rs.100=00 towards disconnection and reconnection charge from the Complainant, where there is no question of disconnection. Admittedly reconnection or disconnection certainly falls within the ambit of the service; hence without providing any service to the consumer the OPs cannot claim/obtain any farthing from him/her. So the OP-1 collected the amount from the Complainant whimsically and illegally, which the OPs are liable to refund the same to the Complainant.
Next the Ld. Counsel for the OPs has placed reliance on the Ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. We have carefully perused the said judgment and it is seen by us that Their Lordships did not mention that complaint/dispute relating to the electric energy is ousted from the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Moreover where there is mentioning in the definition of ‘Service’ in the C.P. Act, 1986 that service in respect of electrical energy will come within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and till today in this regard the C.P. Act, 1986 has not been amended, hence it cannot be said that the instant dispute will not come under the jurisdiction of this Ld. Forum. It is true that in view of the Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003 the consumers are entitled to approach the appropriate authority, but there is no barring provision for coming to this Ld. Forum. As it is an alternative machinery the consumers can easily approach before this Ld. Forum save and except the subject matters which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has specifically directed not to adjudicate the same. Moreover in view of the Section 3 of the C.P. Act, 1986 the Forum has jurisdiction to try with this matter.
Going by the foregoing discussion hence, it is
O r d e r e d
that the complaint is allowed in part on contest without any cost. The OPs are directed either jointly or severally to refund the amount of Rs.100=00 to the Complainant in cash or the OPs may adjust the said amount with the subsequent bill amount. The OPs are further directed for making payment of Rs.200=00 towards litigation cost to the Complainant either jointly or severally. The OPs are also at liberty to adjust the amount of Rs.200=00 with the subsequent electric bill of the Complainant.
Let plain copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per provisions of Consumer protection Rules, 2005.
(Asoke Kumar Mandal)
Dictated and corrected by me. President
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Silpi Majumder)
Member
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Pankaj Kumar Sinha) (Silpi Majumder)
Member Member
DCDRF, Burdwan DCDRF, Burdwan
