C.F. CASE No. : CC/11/94
COMPLAINANT : Satysachi Adhikary
@Sabhyasachi Adhikary,
S/o Late Satish Chandra Adhikary
of Ghurni Bakshipara, Ghat Lane
P.O. Ghurni, P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Nadia
Pin 741103
OPPOSITE PARTIES/OPs: 1) Station Manger / Superintendent,
W.B.S.E.D.C.L.,
Krishnagar Town Electric Supply,
Power house, E/S, D.L. Ray Road,
Krishnagar
2) Divisional Engineer,
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd.
Krishnagar Road Station,
P.O. Krishnagar, P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Nadia
PRESENT : SHRI KANAILAL CHAKRABORTY PRESIDENT
: SMT JHUMKI SAHA MEMBER
DATE OF DELIVERY
OF JUDGMENT : 30th May, 2012
: J U D G M E N T :
In brief, the case of the complainant is that he is a consumer regarding electricity under the OPs having service connection No. C27D/5421. Since installation he has been paying the bills sent by the OP regularly. But for the months of October, November and December, 2011 the OPs sent huge amount being Rs. 13,681/-, Rs. 13,642/- and Rs. 13,642/- respectively which is an excessive one. He raised objection against the bill amount and requested the OPs to rectify the bill, but to no effect. Rather the OPs threatened to disconnect the electric line by sending a notice dtd. 02.11.11. So having no other alternative he has filed this case praying for the reliefs as stated in the petition of complaint.
Written version is filed on behalf of the OP, inter alia, stating that the case is not maintainable in its present form and nature. It is his submission that this complainant is a consumer under him and as per consumption of units bill was sent to the complainant for the months of October, November and December, 2011 and the said bill is a correct one. It is his further submission that one inquiry was held by him on 27.10.11 at the premises of the complainant and in that inquiry it was revealed that the complainant used electricity for commercial purpose by letting his rooms on rent basis to one Bandhan Office for one and ½ years. So as per the enquiry report the category of connection was changed to commercial from domestic on 17.11.11 and accordingly the bill was prepared on the basis of meter reading and consumption of 1938 units in one month. As the complainant did not pay the bill amount, so as per Section 56 (1) of the Electricity Act, 2003, notice was served for disconnection. Besides this after checking it is available that the present load of the meter is 4.14 KW instead of original load 2.26 KW. The complainant used the electricity for commercial purpose without prior permission of the OP. So this OP rightly prepared the bill on commercial use of electricity which the complainant is bound to pay. Therefore, this complainant has no cause of action to file this case and the same is liable to be dismissed.
POINTS FOR DECISION
Point No.1: Has the complainant any cause of action to file this case?
Point No.2: Is the complainant entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
Both the points are taken up together for discussion as they are interrelated and for the sake of convenience.
On a careful perusal of the petition of complaint and the written version filed by the OP along with the annexed documents filed by both sides and also after hearing the arguments on both parties it is available on record that admittedly this complainant is a consumer of electricity under the OP having electric connection No. C27D/5421. The complainant’s specific allegation is that previously all the bills were duly sent to him which he paid according to bill amount. This point is not denied by the OP also. His specific allegation is that the bill dtd. 15.10.11 which was due to be paid for the months of October, November and December, 2011 was an excessive one for which he raised objection and submitted a representation before the OP dtd. 17.10.11 with a request to correct the bill. This bill amount is still unpaid by him also. From the disputed bill it is available that the OP charged for the total units of 5635 consumed by the complainant. From the yellow card, it is available that on 10.08.11 a new meter was installed at the premises of the complainant against the previous one and from that date up to 10.09.11 the total units consumed by the complainant was 1941 which is reflected in the disputed bill also. There is no whisper in the petition of complaint that the new meter is a defective one. Naturally, the previous bill was sent to the complainant for the month of July, August and September, 2011 bill dtd. 08.07.11 and the complainant paid the said bill amount also. After taking the units of 1941 the OP has calculated the units consumed by the complainant for the three months i.e., October, November and December, 2011 as total units 5635 for which the bill amount was prepared and sent to the complainant. On a careful perusal of the yellow card, we find that the total units as calculated by the OP for the months for October, November and December 2011 which the complainant consumed is correct. OP alleges that during that period or prior to that the complainant inducted one tenant under the name and style Bandhan at his premises which was revealed from an enquiry made by him at the premises of the complainant on 27.10.11. So he charged the units as commercial and not as domestic for which the bill amount stood at Rs. 40,683/-. Now the question is whether the complainant used his premises for commercial purpose or not. From all the previous bills filed by the complainant, it is available that the connected load as was shown as 2.62 KW including the disputed bill. OP’s allegation is that as the complainant used his premises for commercial purpose, so he demanded charge on commercial basis including the load as 4.14 KW. At the same time the bill dtd. 04.04.12 filed by the OP in the name of the complainant shows that connected load is 2.62 KW and the bill amount is Rs. 12,566/- for the months of January, February and March, 2012. He also submits that this bill amount is already paid by the complainant also. The OP has not filed any document to show that on which basis he decided the connected load as 4.14 KW for the disputed period only. No whisper is made regarding this decrease of load in the bill sent by him dtd. 04.04.12. Even on the side of the OP no PW is examined on affidavit, inter alia, supporting the contention of the OP that inquiry was held by him in presence of the complainant at his premises when he found that one Bandhan office was doing commercial activities there. What type of commercial activity was done by him is not disclosed by the OP. In his report the OP has not disclosed that this enquiry was held in the presence of the complainant. So considering the facts of this case and after hearing arguments on both sides, we hold that the OP has not become able to established that for that particular period October to December, 2011 the premises of the complainant was used for commercial purpose. We do also hold that no satisfactory document is filed by the OP to that extent. At the same time, we do also hold that the billing unit of 5635 in the bill dtd. 15.10.11 is correct which the complainant is bound to pay for those units consumed by him at domestic rate and not at commercial rate.
In view of the above discussions, our considered view is that the complainant has become able to prove his case in part. So he is entitled to get the relief in part. Thus the case succeeds in part. Considering the nature of this case we don’t find to pay any compensation to the complainant and cost of the case also.
Hence,
Ordered,
That the case, CC/11/94 be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP without any cost. OP is directed to prepare a fresh bill on the units 5635 vide bill dtd. 15.10.11 on calculating the amount as domestic charge and send it to the complainant within a period of 15 days since this date. The complainant is directed to make payment of the bill amount at a time within 30.06.12, in default, the OP will have the liberty to take step against him as per law. OP is also directed not to disconnect the electric connection of the complainant’s premises till that date also.
Let a copy of this judgment be delivered to the parties free of cost.
