IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/225/2017
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
29.12.17 05.01.18 18.04.22
Complainant: Naba Kumar Saha
S/o Anil Kumar Saha,
Residing at Vill + P.O. Rajnagar,
PS-Raghunathganj,
Dist-Murshidabad,
Pin- 742227
-Vs-
Opposite Party: 1.The Station Manager,
West Bengal State Electricity
Distribution Co. Ltd. (WBSEDCL)
Raghunathganj, Customer Care Unit,
(Tapan Market),
P.O. + P.S. Raghunathganj
Dist-Murshidabad
Pin-742225
2. Divisional. Manager, Raghunathganj
Division, WBSEDCL, Omarpur,
P.O. + P.S. Raghunathganj
Dist- MSD,
Pin No. 742225
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Prabir Kr. Banerjee
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party No.1 & 2 : S.S. Dhar
Present: Sri Ajay Kumar Das…………………………..........President.
Sri. Subir Sinha Ray………………………………….Member.
Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.
FINAL ORDER
Sri.Ajay Kumar Das, Presiding Member.
This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.
One Naba Kumar Saha (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against The Station Manager, WBSEDCL & Anr. (here in after referred to as the OPs) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.
The case of the complainant in short is that the complainant Naba Kumar Saha is a consumer under O.P. 1. His consumer number is 3001885700. The complainant used two lights and one fan in his premises and he was paying bill regularly. But one fine morning the complainant found that the meter was running with high speed and also found the meter running even after switch off and then the complainant informed the matter to the O.P.1 on 21.08.2017 in writing but O.P. 1 after the lapse of considerable time installed Master Meter in the premises of the complainant on 12.09.2017 and after 10 days i.e., on 22.09.2017 the O.P. 1 took the reading of the Master Meter and the original meter and found that there was difference of 9 units within 10 days. But O.P. 1 did not install a new meter nor take away the said defective meter.
The complainant being dissatisfied lodged a complaint before the O.P. No. 2 the Divisional Manager on 01.11.2017 in writing with a copy to O.P. 1.
The O.P. 1 did not change the defective meter rather send an inflated bill to the complainant for the month of October, November and December, 2017 amounting to Rs. 8722.36 for each month.
The complainant requested several times for the change of defective meter but the O.P. did not pay any heed to that effect and having no other alternative he is compelled to file this complaint. He prays for relief mentioned in the complaint.
The OPs are contesting the case by filing W/V. They have stated inter alia that the Petitioner is a consumer under this Opp. Party having meter No 82482979. On 21.08.2017 the Petitioner applied to this Opp. Party for reduction of electricity bill for the period of 28-08-2018 to 14-10-2017. On the basis of such application this Opp. Party installed a master meter to confirm whether the existing meter is defective or not. On 12-09-2017 the meter reading of the existing meter was 6838 units and the reading of the master meter was 1530 units. On 22-09-2017 the meter reading of the existing meter shown as 1544 units. From 12-09-2017 to 22-09-2017 the consumption of the existing meter was as 23 units and the master meter it was shown as 14 units. Accordingly the bill for the period of 28-06-2017 to 14-10-2017 has been rectified and the bill amount was reduced to Rs. 25,671/- from Rs 44,580/-. The Petitioner did not pay the reduced bill amount till date so after service of the disconnection notice the service connection of the petitioner had been disconnected. So, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP.
They pray for rejection of the instant complaint.
On the basis of the complaint and the written versions the following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case :
Points for Consideration
- Whether the complainant is a Consumer to the Opposite Parties?
- Whether the Complaint is barred by the Law of Limitation?
- Whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons
Point No.1&2
All points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.
These points were not pressed either by the Complainant or by the Opposite Parties at the time of argument. Moreover, on perusing the materials on record it appears to us that the Complainant is a Consumer to the Opposite Parties and the Complaint is not barred by the Law of Limitation.
All these two points are thus decided in favour of the Complainant.
Point No.3
Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the Complainant is a consumer being Consumer No.3001885700 under the OPs and his Meter No. is B-2482979.
This fact is admitted by the Ld. Advocate for the OPs.
Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that one fine morning the Complainant found that the meter was running with high speed and also found that the meter was running even after switching off the lights and fan. Then the Complainant immediately informed OP No.1 of the matter on 21.08.17 in writing. After the lapse of 20/22 days, the OP No.1 installed Master Meter in the premises of the Complainant on 12.09.17 and after 10 days i.e., on 22.09.17 the OP No.1 took reading of the Master meter and the original meter and found that there was a difference of nine units within 10 days. In spite of that the OP No.1 did not install a new meter nor take away the said defective meter.
In support of his contention, he filed a copy of the Letter dated 21.08.17. He also drew our attention on the reverse of the said letter wherein it is found that meter reading of the Master Meter and the Original Meter are noted on 12.09.17 and 22.09.17 on behalf of the OP No.1 and it is also found that there was difference of nine units within 10 days.
This face is also admitted by the Ld. Advocate for the OP.
Ld. Advocate for the OPs submits that from 12.09.17 to 22.09.17 the consumption of existing meter was 23 units and that of the Master Meter was 14 units. Accordingly the bill for the period from 28.06.2017 to 14.10.2017 had been rectified and the Bill amount was reduced to Rs.25,671/- from 44,580/-.
Ld. Advocate for the OPs further submits that the Complainant did not pay the reduced bill amount till date so after service of disconnection notice the service connection of the Complainant had been disconnected. So, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite parties.
From the materials on record it is found that the Complainant informed OP No.1 of the matter regarding defective meter on 21.08.17 in writing. From the reverse of the letter dated 21.08.17 we find that OP No.1 started taking action on 12.09.17. So, here we find that there is a prominent negligence and deficiency in service on the part of OP No.1.
From the materials on record it is found that on 22.09.17, the OP No.1 detected that the meter of the Complainant was defective and in spite of that the OP No.1 did not install the new meter till today.
Here we also find that there is a prominent negligence and deficiency in service on the part of OP No.1.
From the materials on record it is also found that the OP No.1 during the continuance of its negligence and deficiency in service, prepared the electric bill of the Complainant on 17.10.2017 for the period from 28.06.2017 to 17.10.2017 showing the bill amount of Rs.25,671/-.
The meter was found defective on 22.09.17 and the billing date is 17.10.2017. Here we find the prominent negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the OP No.1. causing harassment of the Complainant for a long period.
Ld. Advocate for the Complainant files their electric Bills in the name of the Complainant:
- Showing electric bill of Rs.1,828/- for the month of Oct’2016, Nov’2016 & Dec’2016.
- Showing electric bill of Rs.2,982/- for the month of Jan’17, Feb’17 & March’17.
- Showing electric bill of Rs.2,268/- for the month of April’2017, May’2017 & June, 2017.
Ld. Advocate for the Ops files one electric Bill in the name of the Complainant.
- Showing electric bill of Rs.25,671/- for the month of Oct’2017, Nov’2017& Dec’2017.
Filing the electric bill of Rs.25,671/-, Ld. Advocate for the Ops submits before this Commission that they are ready to give electric connection to the Complainant if the Complainant pays the said amount of bill even by installments.
But Comparing the aforesaid four electric bills, even a lay man will say that the Bill of Rs.25,671/- was prepared in the name of the Complainant in a negligent manner and without any reasonable basis, particularly when we find that the materials of continuous negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the OPs are available in the record and particularly when it is found that the load capacity of connected meter is 0.23 KVA (Zero point two three KVA).
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion made above, we are of the view that OPs should issue fresh bill for the month of Oct’2017, Nov’2017 & Dec’2017 in the name of the Complainant matching the previous bills so that it does not look odd in the estimation of persons of ordinary prudence. And we are also of the view that he reliefs as prayed for by the Complainant should be given under the facts and circumstances of the case.
In the result, the Consumer case is allowed.
Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that the instant case be and the same is allowed on contest against the OPs without costs.
OPs are directed for sending fresh bill for the month of Oct’2017, Nov’2017 & Dec’2017 in the name of the Complainant matching the previous bill so that it does not look odd in the estimation of persons of ordinary prudence.
OPs are directed to remove the existing defective meter from the premises of the Complainant and to install a new meter.
OPs are further directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- ( Ten Thousand) to the Complainant for mental pain and agony and for harassment.
OPs are further directed to comply with the direction of this Commission within 30 days from this day.
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 Member President.
