IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/86/2018.
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
15.05.18 06.06.18 07.03.19
Complainant: Rakebul Biswas
S/O- Late Majit Biswas,
Vill & PO- Jalangi,
PS- Jalangi,
Pin- 742305
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Station Manager, WBSEDCL,
Jalangi CCC
PO & PS- Jalangi,
Pin- 742305
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Smt. Bidishya Sarkar.
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 Rakebul Biswas (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against the Station Manager, Jalangi CCC, WBSEDCL (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 vide consumer ID No. 300025612 under the OP and got an order in CPA 141/2014 directing the OP to receive bill for 990 units from the Complainant. The Complainant received the final bill on 09.01.15 but the OP did not comply the order before receipt of notice of the execution case in connection with CPA 141/2014. The Complainant paid the bill up to 2046 units out of 6478 units so he was to pay 4432 units.
The OP issued a bill dated 08.09.17 asking the Complainant to pay a sum of Rs.37,715/-. The Complainant requested the OP for rectification of the bill but of no result. The OP has deficiency in service. The Complainant prayed for a direction upon the OP to rectify the bill by deducting the sum of Rs.15,555/- and to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-.
The OP put his appearance and contested the case by filing written version on 11.10.18, contending, that the case is not maintainable and the Complainant has no cause of action to file the case. It is the specific case of the OP that the meter reading as on 08.09.17 was 6478 units and meter reading as on 10.03.14 was 2046 units. Therefore, the Complainant is to pay Rs.40,734/- including the LPSC charges. Out of said amount of Rs.40,734/-, the Complainant paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- and so the outstanding amount is Rs.30,734/- + LPSC of Rs.6,996/- i.e. total sum of Rs.37,730/-.
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.
The Ld. Advocate for the OP has not argued on this point.
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.
The Ld. Advocate for the OP has not argued on this point.
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 has paid electric bill up to 2046 units and paid a sum of Rs.10,000/-. It is argued that the OP was not accepting the bills and an order was passed by this Forum in EA No. 28/2016 dated 23.02.18 arising in connection with CC/141/2014 directing the O.P. to receive the disputed bill amount. It is argued that the OP was not receiving the bill amount from the Complainant and so the OP cannot claim the LPSC from the Complainant. It is contended that the OP has deficiency in service.
The Ld. Advocate for the OP submits that the Complainant is a habitual defaulter in payment of bills. It is argued that the OP is entitled to realize LPSC from the Complainant for non-payment of bills.
We have gone through the materials on record. Admittedly, the Complainant filed a case against the OP being CPA 141/2014 which was allowed on 09.10.15 by directing the OP to give slab benefits.
It appears from the xerox copy of order dated 09.10.15 passed in EA/28/2016 arising in connection with CC/14/2014 that the OP was directed to receive the disputed bill amount from the Complainant as the Complainant was willing to pay the bill.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, we think that the OP cannot add LPSC as the O.P. was not accepting the disputed bill amounts in spite of willingness of the Complainant to pay the bills. We find that the OP has deficiency in service. Therefore, we are of the view that the Complainant may be directed to pay the outstanding amount of Rs.30,734/- by thirty days from the date of this order.
We think that the Complainant is also entitled to get litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- from the OP.
Reasons for delay
The Case was filed on 15.05.18 and admitted on 06.06.18. 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 succeeds.
Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint Case No.CC/86/2018 be and the same is hereby allowed on contest against the OP with cost of Rs.2,000/-.
The Complainant is directed to pay the outstanding amount of Rs.30,734/-as on 08.09.2017 along with dues ,if any, up to the date of this order by thirty days from the date of this order.
The OP is directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to the Complainant by thirty days from the date of this order.
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.
