IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/52/2018.
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
26.03.18 04.05.18 17.06.19
Complainant: Golam Mustafa Sk,
S/o Late Daud Sk, Vill-Kalaganda,
PS& PO-Doulatabad,
Pin-742303
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Station Manger (Doulatabad CCC)
WBSEDCL, PS&PO- Doulatabad,
Pin-742303
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Sri. Pranab Kumar Das.
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 Golam Mustafa Sk. (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against Station Manager, WBSEDCL, Doulatabad CCC (here in after referred to as the OP) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.
The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-
The Complainant is a consumer of electricity under the OP vide consumer ID No. 312302321 and he had been paying bills on regular basis and paid his last bill of Rs.185/- for the months of January-March,2018 on 10.01.18. On 10.01.18, the OP lodged an FIR at Doulatabad Police Station against the Complainant on false allegations.
The Complainant went to the office of the OP to enquire the matter but the OP did not give any proper explanation and the divisional office also advised him to pay the entire fine amount. The Complainant surrendered before the Ld. Court on 08.02.18 and he was allowed to release on bail. The case is still pending before the Ld. Additional Session Judge, Special Court at Berhampore. The OP is threatening to disconnect the electricity connection of the Complainant. The Complainant prays for a direction upon the OP so that the OP cannot disconnect the service connection of the Complainant illegally and without due process of law. The O.P may be directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for mental agony.
The OP contested the case by filing written version on 16.07.18, contending that the case is not maintainable and the case is barred by law of limitation. It is the case of the OP that the Complainant was enjoying electricity under consumer Id No. 312302321 and an FIR was lodged against him for committing theft of electricity under section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and accordingly, the provisional assessment bill of Rs.40,895/- was served upon the Complainant on 12.01.12 and after hearing a final assessment bill of Rs.26,690/- was prepared and served upon the petitioner on 25.01.18. As the petitioner did not pay the bill, the service connection of the petitioner was disconnected on 26.03.18. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. The OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
On the basis of the above versions following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case :
Points for decision
- Is the Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the OP, as alleged ?
- 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 OP for consideration.
On going through the complaint, written version and other materials on record and on a careful consideration over the submission of the Complainant, 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 Ld. Advocate for 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
Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the Complainant has been falsely implicated in the case of alleged theft of electricity and the service connection of the Complainant should be restored. It is argued that the OP has deficiency in service as the OP disconnected the service connection without due process of law. He prays for a direction upon the OP for restoration of electric supply and to pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- for mental pain and agony.
In reply, the Ld. Advocate for the OP submits that the Complainant was a consumer of electricity vide consumer ID No. 312302321 and the service connection was disconnected on 26.03.18 due to non-payment of final assessment bill amounting Rs.26,690/-. It is argued that the OP has lodged an FIR against the Complainant for committing theft of electricity under section 135 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003 on 10.01.18. He argues that the service connection of the Complainant was disconnected on 26.03.18 due to theft of electricity and non-payment of final bill amounting Rs.26,690/-. It is contended that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP and the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief.
Perused the written complaint, written version, the Complainant has not filed any evidence. On going through materials on record and on a careful consideration over the submission of both sides, we find that an FIR was lodged against the Complainant on 10.01.18 for theft of electricity and the Complainant paid provisional assessment bill but he did not pay the final assessment bill of Rs.26,690/- and the case before the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Special Court, Berhampore is still pending.
It is the version of the OP that the service connection was disconnected on 26.03.18 due to non-payment of final assessment bill of Rs.26,690/-.
Therefore, we find no deficiency on the part of the OP. We think that the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case.
Reasons for delay
The Case was filed on 26.03.18 and admitted on 04.05.18. 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 orders.
In the result, the Consumer case fails.
Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint case No. CC/52/2018 be and the same is hereby dismissed on contest against the OP without cost.
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.
President
Member President.
