Judgment

This appeal is directed against the final order of Ld. DCDRF, Dakshin Dinajpur delivered on 21/5/2008 in connection with consumer complaint no. 63 of 2017. The appellant in this case are the Station Manager and Divisional Manager of WBSCDCL, and the respondent is the Consumer Sri Debabrata Karmakar. The factum of this case is that the consumer Sri Debabrata Karmakar lodged a Consumer Complaint before the Ld. DCDRF, Dakshin Dinajpur in the year 2017 to the effect that he is a bonafide consumer under WBSCDCL, vide consumer ID No.  43341422, meter No. 730840166 since 2007. His electric meter was stopped from functioning and reported the same to the concerned office of WBSCDCL on 7/06/2015 by writing. The Electric Authority neither visited the residence of the complainant nor took any steps to replace the defective meter. After 15 days of such reporting, the complainant again went to the electric office where the departmental staffs drawing up a bill of rupees 9431 asked the complainant to pay the same and assured him that after payment they would replace the Meter.  The complainant on 5/5/2016 paid rupees 9431. In spite of such payment the electricity authority did not install new meter replacing the stopped meter. The Electricity Authority also did not take any meter reading since 16/4/2014. Thereafter the Electricity Authority draw up four bills for the said stopped meters on 8/11/2017, 6/11/2017 and 27/11/2017 and 14/5/2017 amounting to rupees 33634, 36308, 33544, 34458 and sent the said bills through telephone massages to the complainant. The complainant’s further case is that all of a sudden on 9/11/2017 the same staffs of concerned WBSCDCL office came to the house of complainant and abruptly disconnected the electric line of the consumer complainant, in spite of vehement protest by the family members of the complainant. The complainant then went to the office of the WBSCDCL and wanted to know the reason for disconnection but no satisfactory reply was there on the part of the WBSCDCL. The complainant further case is that this unlawful, unjustified and negligent act on the part of the WBSCDCL, caused serious harassment and injustice to the complainant and for that reason he prayed compensation for a lofty amount. The Electric Department has contested the case before Ld. Forum and  denied all the material allegations levelled against them by the complainant. Positive case of the OP/appellant is that the complainant paid the electric Bill regularly till March, 2014. After April 2014, he became defaulter and when the meter was became stopped the electric Authority asked him to deposit rupees 2663.87 as outstanding amount for such defective meter and to pay the same for a new meter while he did not pay the said bill. The complainant again came to the electric authority where a bill of rupees 9431 was drawn on 4/2/2016 constituting and outstanding amount and while the complainant was asked to pay all the outstanding bills, he did not make any such payment and for that reason his electricity connection was dismantled on 15/2/2016 and after paying the outstanding Bill, his line was reconnected on 5/5/2016 and for the defaulting period on an average in comparison with the previous bills total 2700 units was calculated for the period from 4/2/2017 to 7/5/2017 and a Bill of rupees 33634 were drawn which also constituted the previous outstanding of rupees 7137.96.

After hearing both sides, the Ld. Forum delivered the impugned judgment where the OP was instructed to install a new meter, draw a fresh bill for the period of 17/4/2015 to the date of delivery of judgment subtracting rupees 6767 which was paid earlier without imposing any LPSC charges. The complainant also was asked to pay the whole amount of the new bill to be prepared by the OP within 31 August, 2018 and allowing the consumer complainant to pay the said bill in  four installments. Compensation amount of rupees 10,000, litigation cost of rupees 3000 was awarded. Being aggrieved with the said order, this appeal follows on the ground that Ld. Forum has failed to appreciate the facts and contended that Ld. Forum has misconceived to the effect that electricity department has sent the normal bill to the respondent but the complainant/respondent did not pay any bill for the period of April, 2016 to April 2017. Thereby resulting in outstanding bill amounting to rupees 33634. The further case of the appellant is that there is provision in the electricity regulation in clause 3.5 where there is a separate Forum for redressal of any disputed bill and the respondent had option to seek relief before the Electricity regulatory authority for proper grievances and as such the impugned order should be set aside.

The respondent Sri Debabrata Karmakar, after receiving notice of appeal, has contested the appeal and appointed Ld. Advocate Sri Bhakta Sarkar to conduct his case in this appeal. The appeal is heard in presence of Ld. Advocate of the appellant as well as Ld. Advocate of the respondent.

Decision with reasons

The admitted position is that the respondent is a  bonafide Electricity consumer since 2007 who enjoys electricity for his domestic residence by paying the bill of electric charges regularly and he was paying the bills regularly till 2014. It is established beyond any doubt that till the meter become defective there was no dispute between the respondent and appellant regarding drawing bills and payments of the same. Now the problems starts when the meter no. 730840166 started to dis functioning and no proper meter reading was shown in the defective meter. As a result, the problem since then cropped up. The complainant by written, informs the electric authority to immediate replace the defective meter. It is apparent that in spite of written notice the electricity authority did not take any proper steps to replace the defective meter  and started to draw bills haphazardly. The bills was preferred only on the basis of  previous averages, and no scientific method applied to calculate the bill. In spite of the payment of the bill amount of rupees 9431, the defective meter could not be replaced. Therefore, the respondent/complainant in spite of consuming the electricity could not make payment of the bills in due time as no bill could be drawn up and sent to his address. On the other hand, the Electricity Authority disconnected the electricity of the respondent on 9/11/2017 without giving him any anticipatory notice. It is mentioned at the time argument on the part of the respondent that the respondent is a School Teacher, having good will in his area. He is a reputed man in the locality and when the electricity Authority came to his residence and forcefully disconnected the electricity line in his residence, suddenly he became belittled to the eyes of his co-villagers. On the other hand, after hearing the Ld. Advocate of the appellant, we found no whispering on their part that prior notice was given to the respondent before disconnecting the electricity line of the respondent. It is the good gesture which has shown by the respondent in this case that he was always eager to draw a proper bill for the period of dis-functioning of meter by scientific calculation and on the other hand the electric Authority has shown total apathy towards the respondent and calculated a bill amounting to rupees 33634 by calculation of 2796 units to be charged for the consumption of 93 days at the rate of 30 units per day. This type of  calculation has no basis  as the appellant at the time of hearing could not substantiate the same by showing any documents that the aforesaid calculation was done applying scientific method. So in our view, the Forum has rightly opined in their judgment that the appellant office was lackadaisical to the respondent’s interest and there was deficiency of service on the part of the appellant authority. The Ld. Forum in their judgment has passed the decent order where the appellant was directed to install a new meter and to draw fresh bill from 17/4/2015 to the date of delivery of judgment subtracting rupees 6767 which has already paid by the respondent and the Ld. Forum also casted duty upon the complainant/respondent to pay the said bill in four installments. For the harassment and mental agony and harm to the prestige of the respondent, rupees 10,000 was asked to be paid by the appellant, which is not found to be excessive one. For the litigation cost  Ld. Forum awarded rupees 3000 which is not found to be exaggerated. Therefore, the Commission after hearing both sides, come to conclusion that no irregularities or shortcomings are found in the verdict, of Ld. Forum and there is no need for any interference. Only the appellant is hereby given an opportunity to comply with the order of the Forum within the stipulated periods as directed by the Ld. Forum to be calculated from the date of receiving the copy of final order of this appeal. It is also established beyond any doubt that the respondent has become defaulter of making payments of electricity bills for the period from 15/2/2016 to 5/5/2016 and 4/2/2017 to 7/5/2017 and for that period a bill has already drawn up by the appellant authority to the tune of rupees 33634. The respondent had an opportunity to move before regulating authority of electricity against the said bill. If the respondent challenged the authenticity of the said bill of Rs. 33634 before the regulatory authority, he could earn the reliefs as provided in the Electricity Act. But  the respondent did not avail the said scope. So the bill drawn up by the appellate authority to the tune of rupees 33634 shall have to be paid by the respondent right now.

Therefore, in our view the order of the Ld. Forum deserves to be confirmed but requires to be modified.

Hence it is,

Ordered,

                The appeal be and the same is hereby partly allowed on contest without any cost. The order of Ld. Forum is modified as follows:-

 1.           The Electricity authority (appellant) shall install a new meter to the service connection and Consumer ID of respondent within one month.

2.            The respondent shall pay  Bill amount of rupees 33634 by two installments within two months subtracting rupees 6767 which he has already paid on 5/5/2016 and also subtracting rupees 10000 as compensation award in his favour by the Forum and litigation cost of rupees 3000 from the said bill. The appellate authority will be debarred from imposing L.P.S.C. charges in respect of bill amount rupees 33634 and the Station Manager is also exonerated from the personal liability fixed upon him by the Ld. Forum in order no. 4 of the final order dated 21/5/2018.

The copy of this appeal be supplied to the parties of this appeal free of cost and same to be communicated to the Ld. D.C.D.R.F., Dakshin Dinajpur.