IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
MURSHIDABAD , AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC No. 65/2017.
Date of Filing : Date of Admission : Date of Disposal :
24.04.2017 16.05.2017 20.12.2017
Durjodhan Das,
S/o Sufal Das,
Vill. & P.O. Khidirpur,
P.S. Beldanga, Dist. Murshidabad, Pin:742134. …… Complainant.
-vs-
Station Manager,
WBSEDCL,
Sargaachhi C.C.C.,
P.O. Sargachi& P.S. Beldanga,
Dist. Murshidabad, Pin:742134. …..... Opposite Party.
Smt Minoti Ghosdh Hazra, Ld. Advocate … for the Complainant
Sri Siddharth Sankar Dhar, Ld. Advocate … for the Opposite Party
Present : Smt. Chandrima Chakraborty …. .…. Member.
Sri Manas Kumar Mukherjee ……… Member
Cont. ……….…. 2
= 2 =
J U D G M E N T
Chandrima Chakraborty, Presiding Member.
Interference of this Forum has been sought for by the Complainants, contending gross negligence, deficiency and unfair trade practice in rendering service towards the Complainants by the Opposite Parties.
The case stated in the complaint, in laconic, is that, the Complainant is a landless cultivator and under the BPL category. The Complainant used to pay the Electric Bill amounting to not more than Rs. 200/- only per month which is shown from the previous Electric Bill. But the Complainant alleged that suddenly the Electric Bill raised to Rs. 7,000/- only per month and in total Rs. 21,000/- only in three months, what amounts to negligence and deficiency in rendering service by the Opposite Party towards the Complainant for which the Complainant finding no other alternative than to file the instant case seeking adequate redressal against the Opposite Party.
Resisting the complaint, the Opposite Party filed the Written Version denying the contention made by the Complainant in his complaint and stating inter alia that the case is not maintainable, the Complainant has no cause of action, barred by limitation and the Forum has no jurisdiction to deal the instant matter.
The specific case of the Opposite Party in gist, is that, the Complainant is a domestic consumer having Consumer ID No. 312340213. On 11.12.2016 after taking the meter reading it was found that the total consumed unit is 2828 units during the period from 24.08.2012 to 11.12.2016 but the Complainant had paid the Bills for 337 units only and so the Opposite Party has claimed the amount against that consumed units.
Cont. ……….…. 3
= 3 =
The Complainant had filed an application for checking the Meter which was found in order after checking the same and again has checked the said Meter on 17.02.2017 in presence of the Complainant and the same is not found to be defective. So the Complainant is bound to pay the charged Electric Bill as claimed for.
Thus, the Opposite Party denied any deficiency and negligence in rendering service towards the Complainant and prayed for dismissal of this case.
Point for Determination
1. Whether the instant case is maintainable ?
2. Whether the Complainant is a consumer ?
3. Whether there is negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the O.P?
4. Whether the Complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?
Decision with Reasons
All the points are taken up together for consideration for convenience and brevity.
The main dispute between the Complainant and the Opposite Party is that, whether the Opposite Party are justified to charge the said disputed Bill in favour of the Complainant and whether the Complainant is at all liable to pay the said Bill amount towards the Opposite Party or not.
On overall evaluation of the argument made before us by the Ld. Lawyers for the both parties and the material evidences on record, it is evident that admittedly the Complainant is a consumer under this Opposite Party having Consumer ID No. 312340213.
Cont. ……….…. 4
= 4 =
The record reveals that admittedly the Complainant had paid the Bills for 337 units only @ not more than Rs. 200/- only per month during the period from 24.08.2012 to 11.12.2016 . But the actual fact remains that during the aforesaid period the total unit consumed by the Complainant was 2,828 units in total out of which the Complainant had actually paid for 337 units only for which the Complainant had to pay the Electric Bill @ not more than Rs. 200/- only per month.
At the time of hearing the argument the Opposite Party admitted the fact that when this fact came to the knowledge of the Opposite Party after taking the Meter reading, the Opposite Party has claimed the Bill amount of the balance 2,491 (2828 – 337) units and for this reason suddenly the said Bill amount has enhanced from not more than Rs. 200/- per month to approximately Rs. 7,000/- only per month, i.e. Rs. 23,508/- only in total in the said disputed Bill in question.
It is further revealed at the time of hearing the argument that the Complainant had filed an application for alleging the defective Meter and the Opposite Party after checking the said Meter twice and lastly on 17.02.2017 in presence of the Complainant and found the said Meter as not be defective which is verbally admitted by the Ld. Advocate for the Complainant.
Moreover, the Ld. Advocate for the Opposite Party admitted to offer the slab benefit in favour of the Complainant in payment of the said Electric Bill.
Furthermore, at the time of hearing argument, the Ld. Advocate for the Complainant alleged that the Opposite Party has disconnected the electric connection after issuing a notice dated 13.02.2017 in the name of the Complainant for which the Complainant has to suffer a lot which is not reflected in the petition of Complaint but the Ld. Advocate for the Opposite Party remains silent regarding the matter.
Cont. ……….…. 5
= 5 =
But the fact remains that the Complainant is a consumer claimed to be fallen under the BPL category but the Complainant/Consumer miserably failed to submit any document in support to show the same. But on the ground that though the total electric Bill charged for total balanced units in whole towards the Complainant, the unanimous decision of the Forum is that the Complainant is allowed to pay the total Electric Bill amount for balanced units in some installments but without any compensation as there is no fault on part of the Opposite Party.
Thus in the light of the above analysis the Complainant is directed to pay the total sum of Rs. 23,508/- only in total 16 monthly installments @ Rs. 1,500/- only per month in first 15 installments and Rs. 1,008 in last 16th installment. The Complainant is also directed to pay the current Electric Bills as per date mentioned in the said Bill along with the said installments.
The Complainant is further directed to pay the 1st installment within one month from the date of this Order and the Opposite Party is further directed to re-connect the said electric connection within three days from the payment of such amount of 1st installment. It is to mention, further, here that if the Complainant failed to pay the amount of installment and/or current Electric Bill the Opposite Party has the liberty to take any step/s as per their rules and regulations.
In the view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the Complainant has partly proved the case in his favour is entitled to get the relief in part as prayed for and consequentially the points for consideration are decided partly in affirmative.
In short, the Complainant deserves success in part.
In the result, we proceed to pass
Cont. ……….…. 6
= 6 =
O R D E R
That the case be and the same is allowed in part on contest against the Opposite Party without any cost.
That the Complainant is directed to pay a total sum of Rs. 23,508/- only in total 16 monthly installments @ Rs. 1,500/- only per month in 15 months and Rs. 1,008 in last 16th installment within the 10th day of each month.
That the Complainant is further directed to pay amount of the 1st installment of Rs. 1,500/- only within one month from the date of this ‘Order’.
That the Complainant is further directed to pay the current Electric Bills as per the date mentioned in the said Bill as received from the Opposite Party along with the amount of installment per month.
That in case of any default in payment of current Bill and/or payment of installments per month on the part of the Complainant, the Opposite Party is at liberty to act as per their Rules and Regulations.
That the Opposite Party is directed to re-connect the said electric connection in the residence of the Complainant within three days from the date of such payment of 1st installment amount by the Complainant.
That the Opposite Party is further directed to receive the aforesaid amount of the installment/s per month as ordered by this Forum from or on behalf of the Complainant in each month along with the current Electric Bill.
Cont. ……….…. 7
= 7 =
In the event of non compliance of any portion of the Order by the Opposite Party within a period of one month from the date of this Order, the Opposite Party shall have to pay a sum of Rs. 100/- per day, till its realization, as punitive damages which amount shall be deposited by the Opposite Party in the State Consumer legal Aid Fund.
Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgment / be sent forthwith under ordinary post to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.
