West Bengal

Bankura

CC/11/2019

Sri Rabial Sekh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Station Manager, Bishnupur Group Electricity Supply - Opp.Party(s)

Self

14 Mar 2023

ORDER

IN    THE   DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSION BANKURA

Consumer Complaint No. 11/2019

Date of Filing : 08.02.2019

Before:

1. Samiran Dutta                              Ld. President.      

2. Rina Mukherjee                          Ld. Member. 

3. Siddhartha Sankar Bhui            Ld. Member.

 

For the Complainant: Ld Advocate Mahiuddin Ahmed

For the O.P. Ld Advocate Jayanta Chowdhury

 

Complainant                                                                                                               

Sri Rabial Sekh, S/o Mantaj Sekh, Resident of Vill. Jamsuli, P.O. – Jiabandi, P.S. – Bishnupur, Dist- Bankura, West Bengal.     

Opposite Party  

Station Manager, Bishnupur Group Electricity Supply, W.B.S.E.D.C.L., Bishnupur, P.O. & P.S.- Bishnupur, Dist-Bankura, West Bengal

 

FINAL ORDER / JUDGEMENT             

                                                                                                                                              

Order No.33                                                                                   

Dt. 14-03-2023

Both parties file hazira through advocate.

The case is fixed for argument.

After hearing argument from both sides the Commission proceeds to dispose of the case as hereunder: -

The complainant is a consumer of Submersible Pump (SMP) under O.P. vide consumer I/D No.233236750, Installation No.70572 and meter No.RSX73025 and requested the O.P. to install TOD meter but the O.P. did not take any step in this regard and ultimately on the assurance of the O.P. the complainant paid Rs.2452.73 as LPSC in order to get the TOD meter installed into the SMP and thereafter O.P. raised a final bill dated:18-01-2019 claiming 3237 units of consumption and the complainant is ready to pay the said final bill but the O.P. refused to accept the same and ultimately TOD meter was not installed to the electric connection which has already been disconnected on 08-07-2015. Hence this case for installation of TOD meter upon restoration of electric connection on payment of the final bill dated: 18-01-2019.                                                                         

                                                                                                                                                                                             Contd…..p/2

Page: 2

         The O.P. contested the case by filing written version contending inter alia that the complainant has another SMP connection in the vicinity No. being 200377569 but a theft case has been lodged against the complainant being Bishnupur P.S. case No.116/18, dt.21-06-2018 with regard to that service connection where O.P. demanded Rs.3,44,315/- for the aforesaid theft case and the installation of TOD meter to the disconnected service connection of the instant case has been refused for non-payment of that outstanding dues. Their further contention is that in view of Notification No.46/WBERC, Calcutta, dt.31-05-2010 in Regulation 13.9 the complainant is required to pay all outstanding dues in respect of any other service connection held in his or her name located in the area of supply in order to get new connection for supply of electricity.   

           The O.P. is ready and willing to restore the disconnected electric connection and installation of TOD meter as prayed for by the complainant subject to payment of outstanding dues of Rs.3,44,315/- in connection with his another service connection as referred to above.

Decisions with reasons

The Commission has examined the entire facts of the case and the contention, submission on both sides and the documents of the respective parties. Admittedly there is no outstanding dues for the disconnected service connection No. being 233236750 but the complainant has outstanding dues of Rs,3,44,315/- for another service connection in his name in the same locality No. being 200377569 owing to the theft case lodged by the O.P. against the complainant vide Bishnupur P.S. Case No.116/18, dt.21-06-18 and this connection also stands disconnected till now.                                                                                                                           

      Now the question is whether the complainant is entitled to get restoration of electric connection to his earlier service connection No. being 233236750 for non-payment of outstanding dues in connection with subsequent service connection No. being 200377569.

                                                                                                                                                                                        Contd…..p/3

Page: 3

      Though the complainant has cleared the entire bill for the first service connection but the O.P. is reluctant to restore the said connection without payment of the outstanding dues for the second service connection because of the theft case under 135 of Electricity Act, 2003. When both the connection stands disconnected it is the duty of the consumer to pay all outstanding dues in respect of other service connection in his name in the area of same supplier and the Notification No. 46/WBERC, dt.31-05-2010 as referred to above has put an embargo on the consumer on getting connection for supply of electricity without payment of outstanding dues to other service connection in his name. This regulation has statutory force and is therefore applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case.

           Readiness and willingness to pay the final bill dated: 18-01-2019 will not enable the complainant to get the restoration of service connection No. being 233236750 unless the outstanding dues of Rs.3,44,315/- is cleared in connection with his another service connection No. being 200377569. Payment of such outstanding dues is the civil liability of the consumer having no connection with his criminal liability with regard to the above mentioned theft case.

      If we analyze the facts of the case from different angles it will be seen that the complainant is not a bona fide consumer as he managed to get subsequent service connection when his first connection was disconnected and now he is ready and willing to pay the final bill for the first connection  when he has a huge outstanding dues for the second connection. The complainant has not come with clean hands before this Commission as he has suppressed the fact of his obtaining second service connection as referred to above.

           Thus considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the law of equity the Commission is reluctant to grant reliefs in this case.

                                                                            Hence it is ordered………

That the case is dismissed on contest but without cost.

Both parties be supplied copy of this order free of cost.

 

    __________________                   ________________                  ________________

HON’BLE   PRESIDENT           HON’BLE    MEMBER          HON’BLE    MEMBER