IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.

             CASE No.  CC/15/2018.

 Date of Filing:                    Date of Admission:                Date of Disposal:

     12.02.18                                  21.02.18                                       

Complainant: Samir Kr. Mondal

S/o Nitai Pada Mondal

Vill-Rosbeloria, PO-Dohalidangapara,

PS-Sagardighi, Dist-Murshidabad,

Pin-742226

-Vs-

Opposite Party: Station Manager,

Sagardighi Customer Care Centre,

 WBSEDCL, Vill&PO&PS- Sagardighi,

Dist-Murshidabad,

Pin-742226

Agent/Advocate for the Complainant            : Sri. Partha Majumder

Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party         : Sri. Siddhartha Sankar Dhar.

                       Present:   Sri Asish  Kumar Senapati………………….......President.                              

                                          Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.

FINAL ORDER

 Asish Kumar Senapati, Presiding Member.

    This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.

            One Samir Kr. Mondal (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against The Station Manager, Sagardighi CCC, WBSEDCL (here in after referred to as the Os) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.

   The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-

            The Complainant is a customer of the OP for STW connection vide consumer ID No.301779449 and he used to pay electricity bill as per consumption. The OP filed a case against the Complainant vide Sagardighi PS case No. 414/2017 dated 08.09.17 under section 135 (1)(a) of the Indian Electricity Act on false allegations. Subsequently, the Complainant deposited pilferage energy charge amounting Rs.70,000/-. In spite of that the OP did not reconnect the electricity connection of the Complainant. The cause of action arose on 13.11.17 and 18.12.17. Hence, the Complainant has filed the case praying for a direction upon the OP for reconnection of his electricity.

            The OP contested the case by filing written version on 04.05.18 contending that the Complainant is not a consumer and this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the case.

            It is the specific case of the OP that the Complainant is a permanent STW consumer having ID No. 30177949 and during the inspection by the officials of the OP, it was found that submersible pump was being operated by passing the energy meter by means of extra cables. Accordingly an FIR was lodged on 25.03.17 vide FIR No. 145 of 2017 under section 135(1)(b) of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003. Thereafter, a final assessment bill of Rs.1,18,171/- was served to the Complainant. On 07.09.17, another FIR was lodged against the Complainant by the Divisional Engineer, WBSEDCL (S and LP) vide FIR No. 414 of 2017 dated 08.09.2017 under section 135(1)(b) of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003. Thereafter, a final assessment bill of Rs.78,465/- was served upon the Complainant and the petitioner moved the Hon’ble High Court for anticipatory bail vide CRM No. 10921 of 2007 and the Hon’ble Court passed an order on 13.11.17 to pay Rs. 30,000/- for anticipatory bail and the Complainant paid Rs.30,000/- on 18.12.17. The outstanding dues is Rs.1,35,103.0/- and the Complainant is not entitled to get reconnection of his service connection without making the payment of outstanding dues along with LPSC charges and reconnection charge. It is the case related to non-payment of pilferage bills. So, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the case of the Complainant. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.  

            On the basis of the above version the following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case :

Points for consideration

1. Isthe Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?

2. Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?

3. Has the OP any deficiency in service, as alleged?

4. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?

Point no.1

The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the Complainant is a consumer as she hired services of the OPs for consideration.

The Ld. Advocates for the OPs submit that the Complainant is not a consumer. On going through the complaint, written version and other materials on record and on a careful consideration over the submission of both sides, we find that the Complainant is a consumer in terms of section 2 (I )(d) (ii) of the C.P.Act, 1986.

Point No.2

     The Complainant submits that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and the claimed amount is also within pecuniary limit of the District Forum.

On a careful consideration over the materials on record, we find that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and this Forum has pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Both the points are thus disposed of.

Point Nos.3&4

            The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the OP lodged false FIR against the Complainant and the Complainant is entitled to get reconnection of his electricity connection as the Complainant paid pilferage amount of Rs.70,000/-. He argues that the Complainant deposited the amount of Rs.70,000/- as per direction of the Hon’ble High Court in respect of pilferage energy charge. he argues that the OP has deficiency in service and the Complainant entitled to get relief against the OP.

             In reply, the Ld. Advocate for the OP submits that two FIRs was lodged against the Complainant for theft of electricity vide FIR No.145 of 2017 dated 25.03.17 and 414 of 2017 dated 08.09.17. It is contended that this case of non-payment of pilferage bills and this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain any claim raised by a customer who is guilty of non-payment of pilferage bills. He prays for dismissal of the complaint.

            We have gone through the written complaint, written version, evidence of the Complainant. The Complainant has not filed a sheet of paper to establish the claim. Admittedly, the Complainant had a STW connection vide consumer ID No. 301779449 and it is clear from the written version of the OP that two FIRs were lodged against the Complainant for pilferage of energy. It is also the version of the OP that total outstanding dues from the Complainant is Rs.1,35,103.02/-. There is no denial of the said fact in the evidence of the Complainant. Therefore, we find that a huge amount is outstanding from the Complainant and the connection was disconnected due to theft of electricity. We find no reason to believe that there is any deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence, the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case.

Reasons for delay

The Case was filed on 12.02.18 and admitted on 21.02.18. This Forum 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 order.

Fees paid are correct.

In the result, the complaint case fails.

Hence it is

                                             ORDERED

that the complaint case No. CC/15/2018 be and the same is hereby dismissed on contest against the OP.

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                                                                                                   President.