C.F. CASE No. : CC/09/101
COMPLAINANT : Utpal Biswas
S/o Late Santosh Kr. Biswas
Vill. & P.O. Dignagar,
P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Nadia
OPPOSITE PARTY/OP : Sr. Station Manager,
West Bengal State Electricity
Distribution Co. Ltd.,
Dignagar Group Electric Supply,
Vill. + P.O. Dignagar, P.S. Kotwali
Dist. Nadia
PRESENT : KANAILAL CHAKRABORTY PRESIDENT
: KUMAR MUKHOPADHYAY MEMBER
: SMT SHIBANI BHATTACHARYA MEMBER
DATE OF DELIVERY
OF JUDGMENT : 23rd August, 2010
: J U D G M E N T :
In brief, the case of the complainant is that he has a domestic service connection No. ED/2/1277 under the OP for electricity consumption. It is his further case that for the period from September, 08 to November, 08 electricity charge was Rs. 1146/-, during December, 08 to February, 09 the charge was Rs. 466/-. During the period from March, 09 to May, 09 the electric bill was Rs. 611/- and for the period from June, 09 to August, 09 the electric bill was Rs. 145/-. But surprisingly during the period from September, 09 to November, 09 his electric bill came at Rs. 6180/- which is an excessive one also as he did not consume the units claimed by the OP. Meter reading was duly taken by the OP on different dates which is noted in the meter card also. In the bill for the period from September, 09 to November, 09 the previous reading was written as 8948 in lieu of 8148. So 800 units has been charged in excess and for this he has to pay Rs. 6180/-. Therefore, he has filed this case praying for the reliefs as stated in the prayer portion of the petition of complaint. By a subsequent amendment dtd. 05.05.2010 the complainant has prayed for considering all the bills since 11.12.07 to 15.09.09 supplied by the OP at the time of trial of this case. This amendment was allowed by this Forum vide order No. 17, dtd. 25.05.10.
The OP electricity supply has contested this case by filing a written version, inter alia, stating that the case is not maintainable in its present form and nature. It is his submission also that as per prayer of the complainant his meter was tested by one technical-in-charge, Sri Kalidas Biswas and found the meter in OK condition. On 05.01.10 the Station Manager inspected the premises of the complainant and noted the meter reading as 9555. It is his contention also that physically meter reading was taken on 12.09.09 as 8948 but erroneously, in the bill the claim amount was written as 8148 which is a mistake on the part of the currier agency. Naturally, the OP has not claimed any excess unit charge in the subsequent bill, rather in the subsequent bill the previous units were only noted and the bill was prepared accordingly. So the complainant has no cause of action to file this case and the same is liable to be dismissed against him. No additional written version is filed by the OP after allowing the amendment petition.
POINTS FOR DECISION
Point No.1: Has the complainant any cause of action to file this case?
Point No.2: Is the complainant entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
Both the points are taken up together for discussion as they are interrelated and for the sake of convenience.
On a careful perusal of the petition of the complaint along with annexed documents and the written version filed by the OP and after hearing the arguments advanced by the ld. lawyers for the parties it is available on record that the complainant is a consumer under the OP having service connection No. ED/2/1277. Complainant’s specific allegation is that in the electric bill for the period from September, 09 to November, 09 the units as consumed was written as 8948 in lieu of 8148 which is erroneous. Practically 800 units have been charged in excess by the OP and for this he has to pay Rs. 6180/-. From the yellow card 'Annexure – 1’ it is available that up to 06.12.09, 9459 units were consumed by the complainant and from the same card it is also available that on 17.11.07 the total consumption was 5648 units. So we find that during the period from 17.11.07 to 06.12.09 the total units consumed by the complainant was 9549 – 5648 = 3811 units and the complainant is bound to pay the charge for the above said units. From the document filed by the OP it is available that out of consumed units of 3811 he adjusted 2037 units in different bills dtd. 11.12.07, 22.03.08, 13.06.08, 18.09.08, 15.12.08, 05.03.09, 05.06.09 & 15.09.09. From the bills of the above dates it is also available that the complainant paid for 1192 units, i.e., the adjustment units being 2037 + paid units 1192 = 3229 units. It is also available on record from the documents filed by the parties that the chargeable units are 3811 for the period from 17.11.07 to 12.09.09 out of which 3229 units are already adjusted by the OP and paid by the complainant. So the actual due units which the complainant is to pay stands at 3811 – 3229 = 582 units. So considering the documents on both sides we hold that the complainant is to pay for the balance units of 582 only. We do also hold that the claim of the OP vide its bill dtd. 11.12.2009 for 1311 units is not a correct one. So this bill dtd. 11.12.09 is treated to be cancelled.
Therefore, in view of above discussions and considering the documents filed by the parties our view is that the complainant is to pay for due units of 582 only instead of 1311 units as claimed by the OP vide bill dtd. 11.12.09. Considering all these we hold that the complainant has become able to prove his case. So he is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for. Considering the nature of this case we do also hold that the complainant is not entitled to get any compensation in this case as he has not still paid the amount for the bill dtd. 11.12.09 claiming chargeable unit of 1311 units. Due to official error this bill was sent to the complainant. So we don’t incline to pay any litigation cost to the complainant in this case. In result the case succeeds.
Hence,
Ordered,
That the case, CC/09/101 be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP without any cost. The OP is directed to issue a fresh bill in the name of the complainant with regard to consumption of 582 units within a period of 30 days since this date after cancelling the last bill dtd. 11.12.09 and the complainant is also directed to pay the bill amount within 45 days thereafter since this date.
Let a copy of this judgment be delivered to the parties free of cost.
