IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No.CC 84/2017.
Date of Filing: 01.06.2017. Date of Final Order:14.06.2018.
Complainant: Sri Sastipada Das, S/O Banayari Das, Vill. Mirzapur,P.O. Fatepur, P.S. Burwan, Dist. Murshidabad, Pin 742132
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Station Manager, WBSEDCL, Panchthupi CCC, P.O. Panchthupi,
P.S. Burwan, Dist. Murshidabad, Pin 742161.
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Sri Arindam Banerjee.
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party : Sri Siddhartha Sankar Dar.
Present: Sri Asish Kumar Senapati…………………. President.
Smt. Chandrima Chakraborty ……………………..Member.
FINAL ORDER
Sri Asish Kumar Senapati President.
This is a complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
One Sastipada Das (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) filed the case against the Station Manager, WBSEDCL, Panthupi CCC (hereinafter referred to as the OP) alleging deficiency in service claiming compensation and other reliefs .
The gist of the complaint case is as follows:-
The complainant, being a consumer of electricity, having Consumer I.D No. 313039705, used to enjoy the electricity on payment of electric bills on consumption. The complainant paid the bill amounting Rs.6130/- for the period from November, 2001 to June 2002 and August 2002 to January, 2003 but due to negligence of the OP, the said amount was not posted in the system of WBSEDCL. Moreover, the OP imposed LPSC on the said amount.
Subsequently, the complainant paid due amount of Rs.75, 297/- along with disconnection-reconnection charge of Rs.100 on 14.01.2013 and prayed for waiver of LPSC. In spite of that payment, the bill for the period November,2002 to January,2003 is shown as unpaid and the OP did not pay any heed to it in spite of informing the matter in writing on 21.03.2015. Subsequently, the complainant was directed to appear for hearing on Consumers’ Grievance No. 02/2002 against the Consumer I.D. No. 313039705 on 17.06.2015 before the Grievance Redressal Officer of the OP and finally a reasoned order was passed by the Divisional Engineer ( Com) & R.G.R.O, Murshidabad Region on 31.08.15 and it was decided that all the paid non-posted amount should be posted by the respective Station Manager positively within 4 weeks and as regards waiver of LPSC , the Station Manager was directed to place the matter before the competent authority .
But the OP did not resolve the problem and disconnected the supply of electricity in December, 2016 causing much sufferings of the complainant.
The complainant prayed for posting of Rs.6130/- which was paid by him but not posted in the respective account of the complainant. He also prayed for waiver of interest/LPSC and for reconnection of electricity and compensation of Rs.60, 000/- for wrongful termination of electric connection and causing tremendous mental agony, harassment and emotional distress suffered by the complainant.
The OP put his appearance through his Ld. Advocate and filed W/v on 21.08.17 inter alia denying the material facts made out in the complaint, contending that the complaint is not maintainable and the petitioner is not a consumer under the C.P. Act and this Forum has no jurisdiction to deal with the billing dispute. It is the specific case of the OP that the bill for the month of October, 2012 shows there is an outstanding dues of Rs.92,711.15 for the months November,2002 to March, 2008, May, 2008 March, 2011, October 2011 to August, 2012 and October 2012. As the complainant did not pay the outstanding dues for a long time, electric connection was disconnected on 14.08.12. On 14.08.13, the complainant paid only Rs.75, 297/- out of outstanding dues of Rs.92,711.15. The bill for the period of April, 2017 speaks that there is an outstanding dues of Rs.1, 68,577.77 for the period November, 2002 to January, 2003, January, 2013 to June, 2014, August 2014 to Marcy, 2017. So, the complaint is all-along negligent in payment of the electric bills for which the OP imposed LPSC on the bills of the complainant.
It is also the specific case of the OP that the paid non-posted amount of Rs.6130/- has already been posted as per reasoned order passed by the Divisional Engineer and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. The OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
On the basis of the versions, the following points are framed for proper adjudication of the complaint.
Points for Consideration.
- Is the complainant a Consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?
- Has the OP any deficiency in service, as alleged?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief/reliefs, as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons.
Point No.1.
Ld. Advocate for the complainant submits that the complainant is a consumer as he used to pay electric charges for consumption of electricity against his Consumer I.D. No. 313039705. It is argued that the OP had deficiency in service by not posting the amount of Rs.6130/- paid by the complainant on 23.10.2002.
In reply the Ld. Advocate for the OP has said nothing.
On perusal of the complaint petition, W/V, evidence adduced by the complainant, Xerox copies of documents and Written argument filed by the complainant, it is clear that the complainant is a consumer of the OP in terms of the C.P.Act,1986. This point is, thus disposed of in favour of the complainant.
Point No.2.
Ld. Advocate for the complainant submits that cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and the claimed amount is also within the pecuniary limit of this Forum.
Ld. Agent for the OP submits that the complaint is baseless.
On going through the petition of complaint, written version, evidence adduced by the complainant and Xerox copies of documents, we find that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and the claimed amount is also within pecuniary level of the District Forum. Hence, both the points are disposed of in favour of the complainant.
Point Nos. 3&4.
Ld. Agent for the Complainant submits that the complainant paid Rs.6130/- on 23.10.2002 for the bill period from November, 2001 to June, 2002 and from August, 2002 to January, 2003 but the OP had failed to post such amount in the system causing imposition of LPSC and subsequently the complainant paid Rs. 75,297 on 14.01.13.
It is argued that the OP has claimed a sum of Rs.84, 979 including LPSC in the next bill dt. 21.2.2013 wherein outstanding amount is shown at Rs.84, 979/- . It is urged that the OP has wrongly levied L.P.S.C on Rs.959436. He prays for a compensation of Rs.60, 000/- for deficiency in service and also prayed for litigation cost.
In reply the Ld. Agent for the OP submits that the complainant is a defaulter in payment of electricity charges. He admits that amount of Rs.6130/- paid by the complainant on 23.10.202 was not posted in the system, ultimately, the Divisional Engineer by a reasoned order dt. 31.08.15 directed the Station Manager to post the said amount of Rs.6130/- in the system within 4 weeks and it has duly been complied. He fairly submits that the OP can not claimed LPSC for the bill period from November 2001 to June, 2002 and from August, 2002 to January, 2003 as the complainant paid the bills for the said period amounting Rs.6130/- on 23.10.2002 but the OP cannot be restrained from imposing L.P.S.C on the other outstanding bills. He submits that the OP has no deficiency in service and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
Admittedly, the complainant is a consumer of the OP vide Consumer I.D. No. 313039705 and the complainant paid Rs.6130/- on 23.10.02 for the bill period from November, 2001 to June, 2002 and from August, 2002 to January, 2003( as it appears from the xerox copy of receipt No.I/B/99/082343 Dt. 23.10.2002 ) and Rs.75,297/- on 14.01.13 and Rs.100/- (reconnection charges) on 14.01.13. On perusal of the Xerox copy of the bill for the month of February,2017 dt.25.01.17 submitted by the complainant, it is found that the O.P. claimed the amount for the bill period from November, 2002 to January, 2003 which was paid by the complainant on 23.10.2002. We find that the complainant had rightly approached the Regional Grievance Redressal Officer for solution and the Regional Grievance Redressal Officer had passed reasoned order on 31.08.15. The complainant had option to file appeal before the Ombudsman against the order of the Grievance Redressal Officer but non-filing of appeal before the Ombudsman proved that the complainant had no grievance against the order of the Grievance Redressal Officer. The OP cannot impose LPSC on the amount of Rs.6130/- , if paid within the stipulated period as specified in the bill.
The OP has not assigned any reason how the bill for the period from November, 2002 to January,2003 was claimed in spite of the fact that the complainant deposited the amount for the said period on 23.10.2002. Neither of the parties has filed any copy of the bills for the period from November, 2002 to January,2003 . It is clear that the O.P. had claimed the bills for the period from November, 2002 to January,2003 in spite of the fact that the complainant deposited the amount for the said period on 23.10.2002. On a careful consideration of the entire materials on record, we think that the OP has deficiency in service as the O.P. claimed the bills for the period from November, 2002 to January,2003 in spite of receipt of the amount for the said period vide receipt No.I/B/99/082343 Dt. 23.10.2002 on 23.10.2002..
We think that the complainant should be compensated for deficiency in service on the part of the OP. We also think that the complainant should be allowed to get litigation cost of Rs.1, 000/-.
In our considered opinion, the OP should be directed to supply the complainant a fresh bill within a period of 45 days not showing the amount for the bill period from November, 2002 to January, 2003 as outstanding by allowing 15 days time to make payment by the Complainant.
We also think that the OP may be directed to cause re-connection of electricity of the Complainant after observing all the formalities in accordance with law within the period of 15 days from the date of receipt of entire due amount and re-connection charges from the complainant.
Reasons for delay.
The case was filed on 01.06.17 and admitted on 08.06.17. The OP put his appearance and filed written version on 31.08.17. This Forum tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of Section 13(3A) of the C. P. Act,1986 and day to day orders will speak for itself.
Fees paid are correct.
In the result, the case succeeds.
Hence, it is
Ordered
that the Consumer Complaint No. 84/2017 be and the same is hereby allowed on contest against the OP with litigation cost of Rs.1,000/-.
The OP is directed to pay Rs.2, 000/- for deficiency in service and Rs. 1,000/- as litigation cost to the Complainant by 45 days from the d ate of this order.
The OP be directed to supply the complainant a fresh bill within a period of 45 days not showing the amount for the bill period from November, 2002 to January, 2003 as outstanding by allowing 15 days time to make payment by the Complainant.
The OP is also directed to cause re-connection of electricity of the Complainant after observing all the formalities in accordance with law within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of entire due amount and re-connection charges from the complainant.
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
