District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Dakshin Dinajpur, W. Bengal
(Old Sub-Jail Municipal Market Complex, 2nd Floor, Balurghat Dakshin Dinajpur Pin - 733101)
Telefax: (03522)-270013
Present
Shri Sambhunath Chatterjee - President
Miss. Swapna Saha - Member
Shri Siddhartha Ganguli - Member
Consumer Complaint No. 45/2014
Sri Nengru @Nungru Mahato
S/o Late Balku Mahato
Vill.: Majhian,
PO.: Patiram, PS: Balurghat,
Dist. Dakshin Dinajpur ………………Complainant(s)
V-E-R-S-U-S
1. The D.E. & Divisional Manager,
Dakshin Dinajpur (D) Division,
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd.
P.O & P.S: Balurghat, Dist.: Dakshin Dinajpur.
2. The Assistant Manager (P & A)
Dakshin Dinajpur (D) Division,
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd.
P.O & P.S: Balurghat, Dist.: Dakshin Dinajpur.
3. The A. E. & Station Manager,
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd.
Patiram Consumer Care Centre,
PO: Patiram, P.S.: Balurghat.
Dist.: Dakshin Dinajpur. …………………Opposite Parties
Ld. Advocate(s):
For complainant …………… - Shri Benoy Brata Bhowmik
For OP Nos. 1, 2 & 3 …………… - Shri Sudip Chatterjee
Date of Filing : 11.11.2014
Date of Disposal : 10.09.2015
Contd…P/2
Judgment & Order dt. 10.09.2015
Fact of the case in brief is that the complainant is a bona fide consumer under West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. (W.B.S.E.D.C.L.) having consumer ID No. 400416866 standing in the name of the complainant. The complainant used to pay the bills regularly as per the bills sent by the OPs. While the complainant was consuming the electricity he found that in the month of October, 2013 the meter was not working and he informed the said fact to the OP No.3 on 3.10.2013. After two months a new meter was installed. After installation of the new meter the complainant received a bill with showing of outstanding amount of Rs.15,029.75 paisa. The complainant asked the OP No. 3 on what basis the said amount was claimed to which the OPs handed over a bill amounting to Rs.14,738.36 paisa. The unit consumed as claimed by the OPs was not actually consumed by the complainant and inflated unit was claimed by the OPs. The complainant since failed to pay the bill amount the service connection was disconnected without serving any notice upon the complainant. Since, the complainant has been harassed and his electric connection has been disconnected for which the complainant has filed this case praying for correction of bills and also for compensation of Rs.50,000/-.
OPs have contested the case by filing a written version whereby the OPs denied all the material allegations made by the complainant. It was specifically stated by the OPs that the complainant is a consumer under Patiram CCC, he paid the bills previously as per demand of the OPs but he raised the objection firstly of the bill dt. 30.8.2014 of Rs.156.93 paisa. When the complainant raised objection then it first came to the knowledge of the OP No. 1 about the incident and then is outstanding bill amount was handed over which mentioned the consumption of 1738 units.
According to Regulations 55 of W.B.E.R.C. clauses 3.1.1 the consumer is liable to preserve the yellow card where the reading was
Contd…P/3
noted. The yellow card is to be kept where the meter is located but as the card was missing at the time of taking reading in the month of January, 2013.
At the time of receiving invoice bearing No. 402002485314 an amount of Rs.151/-, the complainant did not lodge any complaint regarding the bill when he found the bill was generated on the basis of wrong reading. He accepted the bill and paid the same on 17.7.2013.
The complainant did not request to serve the duplicate bill copy of invoice No. 100000414578 an amount of Rs.14,746.66 paisa only and he applied for replacement of defective meter on 3.10.2014.
The complainant after getting the bill did not submit any objection regarding the bill or for the previously bill as prepared under clauses 3.8.1 of Regulation 55. The complainant was charged on the basis of the unit consumed by him from 99 units to 1776 units (i.e. 1677 units in the invoice vide No. 402002485314) the amount stands near to the same and the next bill period invoice in generating from 1776 – 1874 i.e. 78 units of the same meter number, according to the clauses 3.8.2 of the Regulation 55. The complainant will have to pay the total bill amount as claimed by the OPs.
The claim made by the OPs was prepared by following of the provisions of Regulation as and when it came to the knowledge of the authority and the bill was prepared as per the consumption by the complainant. There was no illegality and accordingly the OPs prayed for dismissal of the case.
On the basis of the pleadings of the respective parties following points are to be determined:-
- Whether the complainant is a consumer of electricity under the OPs?
- Whether the meter was functioning normally?
- Whether the bill was generated properly?
Contd…P/4
- Whether claimed made by the OPs was excessive and units were not consumed by the complainant?
- Whether there was deficiency in rendering service on the part of OPs?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
So far the point no.1 is concerned – there is no dispute that the complainant is not a consumer of electricity under the OPs and used to consume electricity and paid bills regularly before disputes arose between the complainant and OPs. Therefore this point is disposed of in favour of the complainant.
The other points are concerned – since those points are related to each other so far those points are taken up together.
The Ld. Lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant is a poor rustic villager and from the yellow card provided by the OPs, it is found that electricity consumed by the complainant was 12 units & 33 units per month and the said consumption was made after replacement of the meter and the complainant never consumed electricity of 1738 units at any point of time and the claim amount made by the OP No. 1 was an excessive one and demand of Rs.14,738/- was illegal. In order to substantiate claim of the complainant xerox-copy of several bills were filed by the complainant, wherefrom it is found that each month the amount was due to the OPs for the month of Feb., 2013 and March, 2013 and the April, 2013 was of Rs.157/- each month respectively. At no stretch of imagination it can be said that the complainant never consumed 1738 units and the claim of the OP No. 1 to the tune of Rs.14,738/- is excessive one and accordingly the complainant has prayed for exemption of the said amount and necessary direction be given to the OP No. 1 for restoration of electric connection. Ld. Lawyer for the OPs argued that if the meter is found defective or it was not functioning properly its incumbent duty upon the complainant to inform
Contd…P/5
the OPs regarding non-functioning of the meter but no such information was given by the complainant at any point of time. Subsequently, while the information was given to OP No. 1 on 3.10.2013 the meter was replaced and the outstanding amount was shown in the bill and on prior notice was issued upon the complainant before disconnection of the electricity. The complainant for the first time raised his objection on 30.8.2014 and when the complainant raised objection then it for the first time it came to the knowledge of OP No. 1 and then outstanding bill amount was handed over to the complainant of 1738 units.
Ld. Counsel on behalf of the OPs emphasized that as per Regulation 55 of W.B.E.R.C. clauses 3.1.1 the complainant is liable to preserve the yellow card where recording of consumption to be made and the card is to be kept near the meter but the card was missing at the time of taking reading in the month of Jan., 2013. Even at the time of receiving invoice bearing No. 402002485314 an amount of Rs.151/- the complainant did not lodge any complaint regarding the bill when he found that the bill was generated on the basis of wrong reading and he paid the bill amount on 17.7.2013. The complainant did not request to serve him the duplicate bill copy of invoice No. 100000414578 an amount of Rs.14,746.66 paisa and he applied for replacement of defective meter subsequently. Reading of 1874 unit was taken from the complainant’s premises and claim after last paid reading unit 136 in the invoice No. 100000414578 and after getting the said bill the complainant did not submit any objection regarding the said bill which was prepared under clause 3.8.1 of Regulation 55. In view of the said fact that since premises of the complainant was found non-accessibility of complainant’s premises therefore, accumulated units were mentioned in the said bill and the amount was claimed by the OP No. 1.
Considering all these aspects Ld. Lawyer for the OPs argued that after scrutinizing the documents on record it has to be held that claim made by the complainant is fictitious one and accordingly the case is to be dismissed.
Contd…P/6
Considering the submission of the respective parties it appears that the complainant while found that the meter was not functioning he did not inform the said fact to the OP No. 1 and it is also an admitted fact that the meter-reader had no access to the meter of the complainant and therefore the meter reading could not be made possible. Though, the complainant has claimed the disputed bill is illegal one but he raised objection firstly on 30.8.2014 and after raising of such objection by the complainant the OP No. 1 came to know of the incident and handed over the outstanding bill amount whereby it was mentioned that the complainant had consumed 1738 units and even after receiving invoice No. 402002485314 an amount of Rs.151/- the complainant did not lodge any complaint and accepted the bill and paid the same on 17.7.2013. From the materials on record it appears that the complainant never sought for a duplicate bill copy of invoice No. 100000414578 for an amount of Rs.14,746.66 paisa. The unit consumed by the complainant on 1874 units recorded from the premises of the complainant and claim after last paid reading unit consumed by him in invoice No.100000414578 and there it was mentioned 136 units. In spite of receiving such bill the complainant did not raise any objection which was previously prepared as per Regulation 55 under clauses 3.8.1. From the materials on record it is found that in the bill outstanding amount of Rs.14,738/- was clearly mentioned and for non-payment of the said bill amount a notice was served upon the complainant and since the complainant failed to comply with the said notice not paying the outstanding amount. OP No. 1 had no other alternative but to disconnect the electric connection.
Considering all those aspects we hold that the complainant in order to avoid the payment of the said amount falsely filed this case against the OPs and since the complainant is a poor man in order to give relief to him, we should consider that the complainant should be asked to pay outstanding amount in installment so that his electric connection can be restored. Thus, all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Contd…P/7
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
that the instant petition of complaint CC No.45 of 2014 is allowed in part on contest without any cost. The complainant is directed to pay outstanding bill amount of Rs.14,738/- in 7 (seven) installments and he should pay the first installment to the OP No. 1 to the tune of Rs.2,000/- within 30th September, 2015 and remaining installments are to be paid by him within 15 day of each succeeding month and last installment is to be paid to the tune of Rs.2,738/-.
If the first installment is paid by the complainant to the tune of Rs.2,000/- within 30th September, 2015 the OP No. is directed to restore the electric connection within 10 days from the receipt of the payment. The complainant is further directed to pay electric bills regularly henceforth to be sent by the OP No. 1.
Let a plain copy of this order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost.
Dictated & corrected
………Sd/-….…….
(Sambhunath Chatterjee)
President
We concur,
……Sd/-..…… ………Sd/-……..
(S. Saha) (S. Ganguli)
Member Member
- Date when free copy was issued ……………………
- Date of application for certified copy ……………………
- Date when copy was made ready ……………………
- Date of delivery ……………………
FREE COPY [Reg. 18(6)]
- Mode of dispatch ……………………
- Date of dispatch ……………………
-x-
