IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.

CASE No.  CC  90/2015.

 Date of Filing:    15.07.2015                                          Date of Final Order: 16.02.2016.

Complainant: Manjuri Hemram, W/O Amin Hemram, Vill& P.O. Chanak, P.S. Nabagram,

                        Dist. Murshidabad.

-Vs-

Opposite Party: Station Manager, WBSEDCL, Nabagram CCC, P.O. Nabagram, P.S. Nabagram,

                         Dist. Murshidabad. Pin 742184.

                       Present:  Sri Anupam Bhattacharyya   ………………….President.                                 

                                         Sri Samaresh Kumar Mitra ……………………..Member.           

                                                Smt. Pranati Ali ……….……………….……………. Member.

FINAL ORDER

Smt. Pranati Ali, Presiding Member.

 The fact of the complaint case u/s 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986 is that the complainant/Manjuri Hemram is a consumer of the OP/Station Manager, WBSEDCL, Nabagram CCC with a electric connection for his submersible pump for his livelihood. According to the complainant, he used to pay the bills regularly, but astonishingly he received the bill for the month December, 2014 with a sum of Rs.32, 187 for 8002 units. Then he met the OP and as per instruction of OP office he deposited the sum of Rs.15, 000/- on 02.04.2015. Afterwards he received the bill for the month of April 2015 of Rs.20, 869/- for 4787 units with outstanding amount of Rs.68, 570/- . So, the complainant met and requested the OP to correct the incorrect bills, but the OP did not pay heed to the matter which is deficiency in service. Then the complainant was bound to come to this Forum for proper redress.

On the other hand, the OP appeared in this case by filing written version, where he denied the allegations of incorrect bills for the month of December, 2014 and April, 2015. The OP also stated that he sent bills for  energy months after Dec. 2014 with units like 3001, 5003, 4007, 4787, 2379 and 2003, but the complainant paid only Rs.15000/- . So a huge amount is due against the complaint. There is no deficiency in service on the side of the OP. So OP prayed for dismissal of the case.

The only point for consideration is whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the OP or not and or whether there is any relief for the complainant or not.

                                                     Decision with reasons.

It is pertinent to mention that the complainant submitted some documents like money receipts and two electric bills for the month of Dec. 2014 and April 2015. The OP also submitted some documents along with written version.

Perused all the documents in the record, we observed that the disputed bill ie the bill for the month of December, 2014 shows some irregularities, such as the bill for the month of December but there is three months gap between two meter readings i.e. previous reading date is 7.11.2014 and present reading date is 15.02.2015 and the billing date is 24.02.2015. Besides, this the consumed unit is 8012 with a sum of Rs.32,187 which is really a huge unit consumption and bill amount where as the OP himself submitted the bill for the month November, 2014 which shows the consumed units is 125 only with sum of Rs.574.24 . Three previous receipts submitted by the complaint also shows that the bill amount are Rs.1779/- , Rs.870 and Rs.454 accordingly.

On the other hand the OP mentioned in the written version that the month of December, 2014 and onwards months bill are showing huge units like 8002, 3001, 5003, 4007 , 4787, 2379 and 2003, which he evident by the copy of the bills submitted in this case at the time of arguments. But the complainant deposited only Rs.15, 000/- on 02.04.2015. So the outstanding amount is increasing month by month, which must be paid by the complainant as because he consumed electricity.

At the time of filing evidence, the complainant also filed an application under Sec. 13(3B) of C. P. Act, 1986 with a prayer for restoration of his electric connection as because the OP suddenly disconnected his service line on 28.01.2016. During proceedings, disconnection of service line by the OP is another example of negligence.

On the basis of above discussions and the material on recorded, we are of the view that the complainant is entitled to get easy installments to clear off his dues and an order for restoration of his service connection.

Regarding prayer for compensation of Rs.10, 000/- we find that the complainant is getting restoration of service line and installment facilities and for that we are of the opinion that the complaint is not entitled to get any other relief as compensation.

Hence,

                                                                   Ordered

that the Consumer Complaint No. 90/2015 be and the same is hereby allowed on contest in part without any order as to cost.

The complainant is directed to pay the arrear amount of Rs. 1,08,768/-  by 11 monthly installments, i.e @ Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand ) per month for 10 installments and the remaining amount i.e Rs. 8,768/- for the last installment. The first installment is to be deposited as early as possible. Other installments will be deposited within the first week of succeeding months. He is to pay the current bills as usual.

The OP/Station Manager, WBSEDCL, Nabagram CCC is also directed to restore the service connection the complaint after getting the first installment. If the OP fails to restore the connection of the complaint within 10 days from the date of the receipt of the first installment, in that case the OP is to pay @Rs.50 /- per day’s delay as fine and the amount so accumulated shall be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid Account.

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.