IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No.CC 94/2015.
Date of Filing: 27.07.2015. Date of Final Order: 25.4.2017.
Complainant: Badar Sk, S/O Abul Khayar, Vill. Kurapara, p.O. Nagar, P.S. Khargram,
Dist. Murshidabad.
-Vs-
Opposite Party: 1.Station Manager, Khargram Gr. Electric Supply, WBSEDCL, , P.O.& P.S. Khargram,
Dist. Murshidabad. Pin 742147.
2. Astt. Engineer, Kandi O&M, WBSEDCL, P.O.& P.S. Kandi, Dist. Murshidabad.
Present: Sri Anupam Bhattacharyya …………………. President.
Smt. Pranati Ali ……….……………….……………. Member
FINAL ORDER
Sri Anupam Bhattacharyya, Presiding Member.
The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying for exemption from electric bill against Con. I.D. No. 312325860 in the name of the complainant and refund of quotation amount along with interest and compensation of Rs.60, 000/- for harassment.
The complainant’s case, in brief, is that the complainant getting quotation No. KGN/AG/389 dt. 21.10.09 for installation of STW Electric connection for submersible Pump deposited Rs.47,704/- in the office of Op No.1 where the OP has supplied only three poles but not any equipment for the purpose as per agreement. For non supply of any equipment the complainant has not got any electric connection and for that he could not install any pump set. At a distance of about 70/80 meter from the land of the complainant there is H.T line but there is no other electric connection and the same is revealed from the local inspection report in TS No. 69/2015. The complainant had never any submersible pump in plot No. 164 of mouza –Gopalpur and since 2007 the OP No.1-Office is harassing the complainant. A few months before the complainant has received a bill dt. 17.3.15 against Consumer I.D No. 312325860. On enquiry the complainant came to know from the contractor of the OP-WBSEDCL that Op No.1 using the above quotation of the complainant has given electric connection to one Sher Alam 2 km. away in plot No. 2529 of mouza Atai within P.S. Khargram illegally and claiming bill for that connection from the complainant. Inspite of giving written complaint to the OP there was but no result. Then, the complainant has filed the instant complaint. Hence, the instant complaint case.
The written version filed by the OP, in brief, is that the OP has denied the allegation of the complainant as to non-installation of the electric connection to him against his quotation. The OP effected service connection No. AG/16556 in Meter No. RSX 56676 in the name of the complainant on 21.3.12. The bill was raised after taking meter reading. The complainant paid electric bill on 27./12.12, later paid bill amount to Rs.21, 871 on 5.01.15. As the bill amount Rs.33, 841/- was due the connection was disconnected on 25.03.2015. But as the outstanding dues was not paid for more than 180 days, so the Electric connection was physically deemed to be disconnected as per rules and regulation and his Service Connection was removed from his premises. As the connection of the petitioner has been disconnected permanently, he is not a Consumer under this OP and for that the complaint is liable to be rejected. Hence, the instant written version.
Considering the pleadings of both parties the following points have been raised for the disposal of the case.
Points for Decision.
- Whether the case is maintainable in its present form and in law?
- Whether the complainant has any cause of action to file the present case?
- Whether the complainant is a consumer under the ambit of C. P. Act?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for?
- To what other relief/reliefs the complainant is entitled to get?
Decision with Reasons.
Point Nos. 1 to 5.
All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience.
The instant complaint is for exemption from electric bill and refund of quotation amount along with interest and compensation of Rs.60, 000/- for harassment.
The complainant’s case mainly is that inspite of depositing quotation money by the complainant as per direction of the OP vide quotation No. KGN/AG/389 dt. 21.10.09 no electric connection was given for non-supply of equipment save and except supply of three electric poles. But the complainant got bill dt. 17.3.15 for that connection and on enquiry they came to know that the said electric line was given to one Sher Alam using his said quotation at about 2 km away from his land. Hence, the instant complaint case.
On the other hand OP has denied the allegation of the complainant. The OP’s case is that they connected the said line on 21.3.12 and the complainant paid bills of that connection on 27.12.12 and later Rs.21, 871/- on 05.01.15 and for outstanding dues of Rs.33, 841 the said connection was disconnected on 25.3.15. Hence, the OP’s case.
To prove the case the complainant has adduced his evidence-on-affidavit along with relevant documents.
From the documents filed by the complainant particularly the receipts and quotation issued by the OP-WBSEDCL it is clear that the complainant deposited the quotation amount entirely of Rs.47,704/- with the OP-WBSEDCL for installation of electric connection against qu0otation No. 1198 dt. 16.11.10 on the basis of application No. KGM/AG/389 dt. 21.10.09.
The complainant’s case is that he applied for electric connection on his land in plot No.164 of Mouza Gopalpur for installation of Submersible pump there and after depositing the quotation money the OP-WBSEDCL supplied only three poles without any equipment for the purpose and the same were lying nearly.
Though no such electric connection was provided in plot No. 164 of Mouza Gopalpur but the OP has sent electric bill of Rs.33694/- for the outstanding period for 10/12, 11/12, 01/13 to 06/14; 8/14 to 05/15.
But, from the impugned bill it is clear that last payment of Rs.21,671/- was made on 05.01.2015.
Where, the complainant’s further case is that subsequently he came to know from contractor of OP that OP with conspiracy has given electric connection against that quotation to one Sher Alam of Atai mouza in Plot No. 2529 about 2 K.M. away from the land under quotation illegally and claiming bill for that connection from the complainant.
To prove the same the complainant has filed the local inspection report with hand sketch before Ld. Civil Judge(Jr. Division), 2nd Court, Kandi, Murshidabad on 31.3.2015 without any order of Civil Court and for that the impugned local inspection report is not binding in this case.
Further, this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide this dispute as the matter is sub judiced before the Ld. Civil Court.
In this case from the bill in question it is clear last payment has been made and outstanding is there and for non-payment the impugned electric connection has been rightly disconnected.
On the other hand the OP’s case is that they installed electric connection against the impugned quotation on 21.3.12 where bill was paid by the complainant on 05.01.2015 for Rs.21,871/- and the outstanding bill us for Rs,33,841/-.
Now, the dispute is that against quotation even after payment of the same electric connection has not yet been installed where without installation of electric connection claiming outstanding dues and for non-payment disconnected the said electric line.
The disputed electric –connection has been installed in the land of one Sher Alam in Plot No. 2529 of Mouza Atai 2 K.M. away from the land of the complainant in Plot No. 164 of Mouza Gopalpur which is sub judiced before the Ld. Civil Court, Kandi, Murshidabad.
Where, the OP is claiming that they have already given connection and already received Rs.21,671 towards last payment of bill on 5.1.2015.
But, no document has come before this Forum by the OP that Rs.21, 671/- has been paid by the complainant and the document bearing the signature of the complainant at the time of installation of electric connection.
The same being the case of the OP the onus is upon the OP and the OP has failed to discharge its onus and for that the complainant has no liability to pay the outstanding bill.
The complainant’s case as to installation of electric connection against quotation in the name of Sher Alam in Plot No. 2529 of mouza Atai at 2 K.M. away from Plot No.164 of mouza Gopalpur cannot be decided on the basis of local inspection report filed in this case because the same was filed before the Ld. Civil Court where the matter is subjudiced and for that this forum has no jurisdiction to decide the same and for absence of any petition praying for stay and/or any stay order of that Ld. Civil Court this Forum has no other alternative but to proceed with the case on the basis of the available evidence and materials on record adduced by both the parties.
Considering the evidence adduced by the complainant and for absence of vital evidence of Sher Alam of mouza Atai and decision of Ld. Civil Court we have no other alternative but to hold that the complainant has failed to prove his case and as such he is not entitled to get any relief. Accordingly, the complaint be dismissed. There will be no order as to cost.
Hence,
Ordered
that the Consumer Complaint No. 94/2015 be and the same is hereby dismissed on contest.
There will be no order as to cost.
Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgment / be sent forthwith under ordinary post to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.
