IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/35/2020
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
26.02.2020 04.03.2020 09.08.2023
Complainant: Baidyanath Ghosh,
S/o- Late Ananda Gopal Ghosh,
Vill- Kalidaspur,
P.O.-Majyara,
P.S.-Burwan
Dist-Murshidabad.
PIN-731234
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Station Manager,
Panchthupi CCC, WBSEDCL,
P.O.- Panchthupi,
P.S.-Burwan
Dist- Murshidabad, Pin-742161
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Akhter Masud
Agent/Advocate for the O.P. : None
Present: Sri Ajay Kumar Das…………………………..........President.
Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.
Sri. Nityananda Roy…………………………………….Member.
FINAL ORDER
SMT. ALOKA BANDYOPADHYAY, MEMBER
This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.
One Baidyanath Ghosh (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against The Station Manager, Panchthupi CCC, WBSEDCL (here in after referred to as the O.P.) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.
The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-
The Complainant is the customer WBSEDCL having consumer I/D 313146047. The Complainant has filed the case before this Commission having case No. CC/121/13 which is already been disposed of and as per the order of that the O.P. reconnected the electricity after getting Rs. 46/- as charges. Afterthat on 27.01.2020 the O.P. issued bill claiming an amount of Rs. 9669/-. The Complainant prays for cancellation of this bill along with Rs. 50,000/- for mental pain and agony.
Defence Case
After due service of the notice the O.P. did not appear. So, the case proceeded ex-parte against the O.P.
Points for decision
1. Is the Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?
2. Has the OP any deficiency in service, as alleged?
3. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons:
Point no.1, 2 & 3
All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.
Undoubtedly, the Complainant is a customer of WBSEDCL (O.P.) having Consumer I.D. 313146047. The Complainant has already filed case against the O.P. and the final order has already been passed on 14.08.2014. Later on the Complainant filed execution application having no. EA/7/2018 and the same was dismissed on 30.01.2019. The O.P. issued a bill on 27.01.2020 claiming an amount of Rs. 9669/-.
After servicing of notice the O.P. neither appeared nor filed any W/V. So, the case proceeded ex-parte vide Order No. 11 dated 31.03.2022.
It is the fact that O.P. issued bill claiming an amount of Rs. 9669/- So, in our considered view claiming of electricity charges does not fall under the definition of deficiency of service.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the documents filed before us we are of the view that the Complainant has failed to prove that there is any deficiency on the part of the O.P.
Reasons for delay
The Case was filed on 26.02.2020 and admitted on 04.03.2020. This Commission tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act, 1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.
In the result, the Consumer case fails.
Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint Case No. CC/35/2020 be and the same is dismissed ex-parte against the O.P. but under the circumstances without any order as to costs.
Let plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand /by post under proper acknowledgment as per rules, for information and necessary action.
The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:
confonet.nic.in
Dictated & corrected by me.
Member
Member Member President.
