DATE OF FILING : 29.05.2014.
DATE OF S/R : 02.07.2014.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 30.11.2015.
Jata Shankar Singh,
son of late Abhimanyu Singh
of 1/1, Hardutt Rai Chamaria Road, BL A, 3rd Floor,
P.S. Golabari, District Horah,
PIN 711101. ………………………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.
1. The District Engineer,
CESC Limited.
2. The Commercial Executive,
CESC Ltd.,
both of 433/1, G.T. Road ( North ), P.S. Golabari,
District Howrah,
PIN 711101.
3. Abinash Lohia,
son of Radhey Shyam Lohia,
of 9/5, Sitanath Banerjee Lane, 1st floor, P.S. Shibpur,
District Howrah,
Pin 711103.…………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak.
F I N A L O R D E R
- This is an application U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 filed by the petitioner, Jata Shankar Singh, against the District Engineer, CESC Ltd., and two others, praying for an order declaring that the claim made in bill for the month of March, 2014 is illegal and also the claim made by the Commercial Executive, CESC Ltd., by his letter dated 22.02.2014 is illegal and for compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and litigation costs of Rs. 10,000/-.
- The case of the petitioner is that he is owner of premises no. 1/1, Hardutt Rai Chameria Road, Block ‘A’, 3rd floor, P.S. Golabari, District Howrah, having electric consumer no. 5601039313 with meter no. 2729450 and regularly pays the electric charges from February, 2013 to February, 2014. He was surprised to receive a letter dated 22.02.2014 from the o.p. claiming an amount of Rs. 53,518/- from June, 2010 to December, 2010 against Consumer no. 58087115107 which was totally illegal and invalid and he was never a consumer of the above number and no such connection in his house and no such meter also. The alleged bill of March, 2014 contains a threat of disconnection in the event of nonpayment of such bill which was a ghost bill as the petitioner never applied for such connection. This is a clear case of deficiency in service compelling the petitioner to file this case.
- The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 being the CESC Ltd., contested the case by filing a written version denying the allegations made in the claim petition stating that the case is not maintainable and the petitioner has no cause of action to file the case. They submitted further that the petitioner, Jata Sankar Singh, with residential address at 1/1, Hardut Rai Chamaeria Road, Block A, 3rd floor, flat no. A/34 and Jata Shankar Singh of 9/5, Sitanath Banerjee Lane, 1st Floor, Flat no. 101, is one and the same person and is a promoter by profession. He constructed building at premises no. 9/5, Sitanath Banerjee Lane, Howrah. Presently the joint landlord and landlady Mrs. Rita Pandey & Mr. Hansraj Pandey residing having their consumer numbers. They purchased the land from Abinash Lohia who was one of the partners of Jata Shankar Singh and during local enquiry they came to know this and filed their inspection report. The petitioner is not entitled to relief and the case be dismissed.
4. Upon pleadings of parties the following points arose for determination :
- Is the case maintainable in its present form ?
- Whether the petitioner has any cause of action to file the case ?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P., CESC Ltd. ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
5. All the issues are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity for discussion and to skip of reiteration. In support of his case, the petitioner Jata Shankar Singh filed affidavit along with documents denying the allegations made against him. In support of his case, he has filed his electric bill bearing Consumer No. 56010139313 of 1/1, Hardut Rai Chamaeria Road, Block A, 3rd floor, flat no. A/34, which was regularly paid. He also filed before the Forum one letter dated 22.02.2014 written by CESC Ltd., Howrah Regional Office, to him mentioning Consumer no. 58087115107 asking him to pay Rs. 53,518.94 p. and also asked him to settle the matter within seven days. He wrote a letter to CESC Ltd. on 06.03.2014 to look into the matter and cancel the wrongly debited amount from his consumer number. Thus, it becomes crystal clear that this matter pending before the Forum is one connected with the payment of electric bill. This Forum heard the ld. counsel for both the petitioners as well as the o.p. It is settle principal of law that the Consumer Forum cannot entertain electricity bill disputes and this law is laid down by our Supreme Court in the case of CESC Ltd., vs. Sri N.M. Banka and others in Civil Revision No. 14421 of 1996 wherein the Apex Court opined that the correct Forum for a consumer with the dispute regarding correctness of the electricity meter or of the billed electricity consumption would lie before the Electrical Inspector Designated under the Indian Electricity Act, 2010 and our National Commission also in the case of Biswanath Mukherjee vs. West Bengal State Electricity Board & others in 2012 Vol. I CPR page 76 opined that in the case of tampering of meter or demands in supplementary bill, the correct Forum for a petitioner would be to approach the Electrical Inspector designated and thus in the instant case the petitioner chose a wrong Forum and cannot succeed.
In view of above discussion and findings the petitioner failed to succeed in the case.
The court fee paid is correct.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 315 of 2014 ( HDF 315 of 2014 ) be and the same is dismissed on contest without costs against the O.Ps.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( B. D. Nanda )
President, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
