In the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Murshidabad
Berhampore, Murshidabad.
Case No. C.C/149 /2014
Date of filing: 17/11/2014 Date of Final Order: 19/01/2016
Habibur Rahaman .
S/O- Late Nazrul Haque.
Residing at Vill.-Motra. P.O.-Hajarpur Nabagram.
P.S.- Kandi,Dist- Murshidabad, ……………………………... Complainant
- Vs-
Station Manager,
Gokarna Group Electric Supply.
P.O.-Gokarna. P.S.- Kandi.
Dist.- Murshidabad. ………….….………… Opposite Party
Mr. Akhter Masud Ld. Adv. ………………………….……………………………. for the complainant
Mr.Siddhartha Sankar Dhar Ld. Advocate…………………………………….for the Opposite Party.
Present: Hon’ble President, Anupam Bhattacharyya.
Hon’ble Member, Samaresh Kumar Mitra.
Hon’ble Member, Pranati Ali.
FINAL ORDER
Samaresh KumarMitra,Member.
Brief facts of the complaint is that complainant being the beneficiary of a service connection in the name of his deceased father namely Nazrul Haque having consumer No. N 644172 & Service connection No.A-1-2004 for the purpose of running 5 H.P. motor pump for irrigation. Due failure of layer the said pump is inoperative since April,2014 and it was not possible for the complainant to reinstall the pump so he prayed the attention of the OP in that context and by paying Rs.40/- disconnected his connection permanently. Dispute cropped up when the complainant received electric bills after disconnection and he tried to put the matter before the OP but of no result. He averred that he faced threats from the OP as a result he suffered mental pain & agony and filed the instant complaint before this Forum for redressal as prayed for in the prayer portion of the complaint.
The sole OP appeared before this Forum and filed written version in which he averred that the complaint used to run a Motor of higher rating than the permissible limit. And the complainant was a regular defaulter. He paid the bill amounting to Rs.11,020/- for several months. Due to late payment the complainant is under the obligation of paying LPSC. The OP disconnected the electric connection of the petitioner owing to default in payment of bills. And there is no deficiency of the OP so the complaint petition is liable to be dismissed with cost.
The complainant filed written argument which is nothing but the replica of complaint petition.
The argument as advanced by the parties/agents heard in full.
From the discussion herein above, we find the following Issues/Points for consideration.
ISSUES/POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Whether the Complainant ‘Habibur Rahaman’ is a ‘Consumer’ of the Opposite Party?
- Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?
- Whether the O.Ps carried on unfair trade practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?
- Whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?
DECISION WITH REASONS
In the light of discussions here in above we find that the issues/points should be decided based on the above perspectives.
(1).Whether the Complainant Habibur Rahaman is a ‘Consumer’ of the opposite party?
From the materials on record it is transparent that the Complainant being beneficiary is a “Consumer” as provided by the spirit of section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986. As the complainant herein is enjoying electricity supplied by the OP Company and it is admitted by the OP Company being the service provider.
(2).Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?
Both the complainant and opposite party are residents/carrying on business within the district of Murshidabad. The complaint valued within Rs.20,00,000/- limit of this Forum. So, this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case.
(3).Whether the opposite party carried on Unfair Trade Practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?
The opposite party being the largest Electric Supply Company throughout the state having a lot of offices, power stations, substations and power generating stations decorated with a lot of expert hands and running its business with goodwill for a long period and providing/rendering service for development of society as well as implementing a lot of Govt. Programs. So the role of OP Company for the development of the society is unquestionable.
The O.P. herein is the Station Manager of an office of the largest electric supply company throughout the State of W.B. The Company WBSEDCL running its business throughout the state except territorial jurisdiction of Kolkata Corporation. The O.P. Company providing power in the rural areas in different projects for a long period. That is why the consumers in the rural areas are highly grateful to the Company. While providing powers throughout the state it also suffers from many discrepancies. Like not sending/ preparing bills in due time or sending bills for a period when the powers are discontinued and not taking reading regularly as a result the consumers suffers from paying accumulated units at a higher rate. As a consequence the consumers suffer a lot and make their grievances for remedy.
It appears from the case record that the complainant paid the bill of April,2014 amounting to Rs.11020/- on 23.06.2014 but we cannot find the bill which is paid, as a consequence it is not clear to us whether there is any outstanding dues or LPSC which is ought to be paid by the complainant. The bill sent by the OP subsequently for the period 21.07.2014 to 30.08.2014 showed the consumed units are 402 and the amount due within the due date is Rs.6377/- including outstanding amount of Rs.4805/-. But the case record also speaks that the complainant got his service connection disconnected at his request vide Memo No.GKN/7A/228 dated 24.06.2014 by paying disconnection fees amounting to Rs.40.00. Then how the consumption of power arises after disconnection it is the case of the complainant. In the written version, the OP admitted the payment of bills amounting to Rs.11020/- but never assailed the quantum of dues except the dues of LPSC. The OP was under obligation to disconnect the power after collecting the dues from the consumer. The relationship between the service provider and its consumer comes to an end when the consumer voluntarily surrendered his service connection and the OP disconnected the service connection of the consumer after taking appropriate fees. The written version speaks that the power connection of the consumer/petitioner disconnected due to nonpayment of bill amount. But the original document as produced by the consumer vide Memo No.GKN/7A/228 dated 24.06.2014 clearly speaks that “permanent disconnection as per parties request”.
So from the above discussion after perusing the case record and documents in the record we are in the opinion to come into this conclusion the complainant has no liability on the specific service connection. The OP failed to prove the liability of the complainant by producing appropriate documents. On the other hand the complainant failed to prove the deficiency of service of the service provider. As such the consumer is not entitled to get any compensation for deficiency of service from the OP.
4). Whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?
The discussion made herein before, we have no hesitation to come in a conclusion that the Complainant could not able to prove his case beyond any doubt and the Opposite Party is not liable to pay any compensation for deficiency of service.
ORDER
Hence it is ordered that the complaint be and the same is dismissed with no order as to cost against the Opposite party.
The OP is directed not to send any bill further. He is also directed not to collect the bills send earlier after the issuance of disconnection.
Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied free of cost to the parties/their Ld. Advocates/Agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/sent by ordinary post forthwith, for information & necessary action.
Dictated and corrected by me.
