Present         (1)     Nisha Nath Ojha,   

                              District & Sessions Judge (Retd.)                                                                                         President

                    (2)     Smt. Karishma Mandal,

                              Member

Date of Order :  16.10.2015

                    Smt. Karishma Mandal

1. In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-

1. To issue notice to the opposite parties and after hearing the parties be pleased to direct the opposite parties to receive the amount as per order of the court in respect of the amount payable to the opposite parties for the consumption of the energy in the cold storage and in the domestic connection.
2. To pay Rs. 50,000/- ( Rs. Fifty thousand only ) as compensation.
3. To pay Rs. 10,000/- ( Rs. Ten Thousand only ) as litigation costs.

2. Brief facts of the case which led to the filing of complaint are as follows:-

1. This application is for direction to opposite parties not to disconnect service connection 6095 sanctioned load 85 H.P. for M/s Kisan Cold Storage and domestic service connection DS II 228384 sanctioned load 4 K.W. and non domestic service connection no. 56942 N.D.S. II for 2 K.W. in the name of Manager, Kisan Cold Storage further direction not to realise Rs. 42,000/- security deposit for alleged excess load and the punitive bill amount at Rs. 50,530.40/- total Rs. 1,00,530.40/- on the basis of S.T.F. report dated 03.06.2010. ( Vide Annexure – 1 )
2. Also for direction for payment of Rs. 50,000/- causing mental, physical and economical harassment to old ailing complainant.
3. The complainant has been running cold storage since 1946 under sanction load 85 H.P. bearing service connection no. 6095, Rout no. 6-954 cold storage category LTISII.
4. There are separate residential construction in which domestic service connection no. 228384 DSI for sanctioned load 4 KVA is standing and meter is fixed in the name of Rajbanshi Devi another NSDII service connection no. 56942 sanctioned load 2 KVA and meter is fixed in separate premises in the name of the Manager Kisan Cold Storage. ( Vide Annexure – 2 and 2A )
5. A petition was filed on 24.05.2010 before Assistant Electric Engineer Electric Supply Sub Division Machhua Toli regarding burnt of insulation and to change meter and to provide three phase Electric connection but no step was taken in this regard by the official concerned even in spite of verbal request repeatedly. ( Vide Annexure – 3 )
6. The S.T.F. authority made inspection of the complainant’s cold storage aforesaid on 03.06.2010 from 13:30 hours to 16:00 hours and they submitted a wrong incorrect arbitrary illegal report of consumption of excess 35 H.P. It is submitted that there is one motor of 4 H.P. but in report it has been shown two numbers of motors and further in the storage one motor is of 30 H.P. but it has been wrongly shown 40 H.P. Thus one item 14 H.P. excess load is shown by the S.T.F. All activity is for livelihood purpose.
7. The consumption of electric energy in domestic premises are also calculated in consumption of energy in the premises of cold storage. Thus 35 H.P. excess consumption is palpably false which can be verified by any high officials of the department concerned or from any independent agency.
8. The report of S.T.F. is falsified from the reports submitted by the technical officials of the Electricity Board time to time. ( Vide Annexure – 4 )
9. The complainant filed a protest petition on 04.06.2010 before the Chairman Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna against the inspection report by S.T.F. team on 03.06.2010.
10. The item like fan, light, freez, iron, geyser, cooler are in domestic use it cannot be converted into L.T.I.S. tariff as wrongly and illegally shown in the report of S.T.F. 16.553 K.H. and the Senior Electricity Inspector of Government of Bihar has given report of 83 H.P. ( 70 H.P. ) + 13 H.P. they are superior to BSEB. The STF forced the complainant the ailing persons of 85 years old to sign on the inspection report although he does not know English and they unheard and refused his request. Hence having no option he signed the same.
11. The complainant made attempt with request as stated above to provide justice with him but failed and the opposite parties are giving threat to disconnect the electricity line which will caused irreparable loss to the complainant thus the complainant seeks his remedy under the Consumer Protection Act , 1986.

3. The Opposite Parties in their written statement cum Parawise Comments has stated as follows :-

1. The written statement i.e. reply of Parawise facts have been submitted before the Court with seal of E.E.E. ( Rajendra Nagar ) supposing that statement given was true and best his knowledge.
2. The petitioner was present at the time of inspection and he signed on the inspection report.
3. As consumer requested for re – inspection of premises in the office of Chief Engineer ( Energy Accounting ) B.S.E.B. Chief Engineer ( EA ) directed to re – inspect the premises.

The re – inspection was conducted on 14.08.2010 from 14:20 hrs to 16:30 hrs connected load of A/c no. 6095/954 was found to be 80.15 H.P. without one compressor motor make brook ( without name plate ) which is recommended to test the actual power consumption per sec. ( wattage ) from NIT, Patna to avoid any litigation corresponding such compressor motor. No any test report is yet received by the undersigned.

4. The load connected/ energized from A/c no. 6095/954 was the cause to take into the Account.
5. There is 100 KVA dedicated distribution transformer for M/s Kisan Cold Storage with A/c No. 6095/954 metering unit is installed on d/s/s with meter S.L. No. DEB69692 secure make such dedicated metering unit of D/S/S indicates maximum demand 80 K.W. ( 107.23 H.P. ) = 108 H.P. on 29.05.2010 at 10.30 hrs.
6. It is very clear from maximum demand indicated by such metering unit that connected load of A/c no. 6095/954 was greater than 80 K.W.

4. The Opposite Parties further submitted report dated 25.09.2012 signed by Asst. Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Sub Division which is as follows :-

1. Since consumer no. 6095 of dedicated load on 100 KVA D/S/S install in the compound of the such consumer.
2. Meter serial no. BEB 09692 installed such 100 KVA dedicated D/S/S ( transformer ) for the purpose of cross verification ( Energy accounting ) of consumer serial no. 9065 ( LTIS – II ).
3. As the time of first inspection meter installed in the consumer premises for billing of the A/c no. 6095 was found defective.
4. Since the meter installed in the consumer premises found defective hence the reading of meter installed is dedicated D/S/S meter serial no. BEB – 09692 was used for billing purpose as well as for study load pattern of load connected to A/c no. 6095.
5. After study of load pattern of meter serial no. BEB – 09692 ( installed as dedicated D/S/S ), it is found that 80 KW = 107.23 HP say to 108 HP was recorded on dated 29.05.2010 at time 10:30 hrs.
6. Since maximum load ( maximum demand ) recorded in the meter was 108 HP while consumer having contract demand ( sanctioned load of A/c no. 6095 ) is 85 HP which is 23 less than maximum demand recorded in the meter.
7. At the time of inspection dated 03.06.2010 it is found by the inspecting team ( BSEB representative ) as well as consumer representative total connected load with the A/c no. 6095 was 120 HP.
8. Hence billing was made on 120 HP and notice was served to the consumer to fulfill formalities for H.T. connection.
9. Since, as per tariff, 120 HP connected load is under category H.T.S. – I not under L.T.I.S. – II.

The case has been filed for the direction to the opposite parties not to realize Rs. 42,000/- security deposit and the punitive bill amounting to Rs. 5853.40/- and also to pay Rs. 50,000/- on account of mental, physical and economical harassment and also Rs. 10,000/- as to litigation costs.

The case of the complainant in brief is that cold storage is being run by him since 1846 with a connection load of 85 H.P. bears service connection no. 6095 Rout no. 954 cold storage category LTIS II.

There is a separate domestic service connection no. 228384 DSI of connection load of 4 KVA in the name of Rajbanshi Devi and on the NDS II service connection no. 56942 sanctioned load of 2 KVA and the Meter fixed in the name of Manager Kisan Cold storage. It has been stated that a petition was filed on 24.05.2010 before the Asst. Electricity Engineer Machhuatoli Opposite party no. 4.

It has also been stated that report of STF has been falsified by the report submitted by technical officials of opposite parties. Protest has been filed to the opposite party no. 1 against the inspection report. It has further been stated that Electricity Inspector of Government of Bihar has given report of 83 HP. In inspection report signature was taken from the ailing 85 years old person. The efforts of the complainant to settle the matter with the opposite parties but could yield any result hence this complaint has been filed.

The opposite parties have filed written statement in which it has been stated that the petitioner was present at the time of inspection and he has signed. It has also been stated that on the request for re inspection of the complainant, re inspection was conducted on 14.08.2010 from 14:20 hrs to 16:30 hrs.

The load of A/c no. 6095/954 was found to be of 80.15 H.P. without one compressor motor make brook (without name plate ) which is reconnected to test the actual power consumption per second ( wattage ) from NIT Patna to avoid any litigation but test report has not been received.

Regarding changing of burnt meter to provide true power consumption but no step was taken even after several request. It has also been stated that S.T.F authority made inspection of the complainant’s cold storage on 03.06.10 from 13.30 to 16.00 hrs and submitted wrong/arbitrary and illegal report of consumption excess 35 HP. It is stated that there is one motor of 4 HP but in report two motors are shown and further one motor of 30HP but shown wrongly as 40HP. It means excess load of 14HP shown by the S.T.F. It has further been stated that electric energy in domestic premises were also calculated in consumption of energy in premises of cold storage and therefore 305 HP excess consumption in false in may be verified by inspection agency.

From fact already narrated in the forgoing paragraphs. It is clear that premises in question was first inspected by the S.T.F. on 03.06.2010 from 13:30 hrs to 16:00 hrs and the inspection report submitted therein the signature of the complainant but even thereafter complainant approached the higher authority for re – inspection and as per his request re – inspection was done on 19.08.2010 but on that inspection report the complainant refused to sign. The finding of said inspection report runs as follows ;

The premises inspected as per BEEE Rajendra Nagar, letter no. 1115 dated 27.09.2010. The premises inspected and found total connected load 80.15 HP without power consumption of one compressor motor make Brook without name plate. Recommended to check the actual power consumption of the compressor motor verified by N.I.T., Patna.

As per the record the report from NIT has not either been received or not provided by either parties before this forum. Since the second report made on the request of the complainant has not been signed by the complainant and thus it means that intentionally he has avoided to put his signature on report which would have made him liable to make payment as per report.

The opposite parties have provided all the opportunities to the complainant to prove his case but the complainant knowingly ignored all such opportunities and therefore it can be safely concluded that opposite party are not responsible for deficiency in service.

Accordingly, this case is dismissed but without any cost.

                                        Member                                                                   President