DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 50   of   2022

 

Sri Surajit Chowdhuri,

S/O- Raimohan Chowdhuri,

Ramnagar Road No.5,

P.O. Agartala, P.S. West Agartala,    .............Complainant.

Agartala, Tripura(W).

 

-VERSUS-

 

1. The General Manager,

The Tripura State Electricity Corp. Ltd.,

(A Govt. of Tripura Enterprise),

Corporate Office, Bidyut Bhawan, Agartala,

P.O. Agartala, P.S. East Agartala,

Tripura(W).

 

2. The Sub-Divisional Officer,

The Tripura State Electricity Corp. Ltd.,

(A Govt. of Tripura Enterprise),

Durga Chowmuhani, Pragati Road, 

P.S. West Agartala, P.O. Agartala. .......Opposite Parties.

 

__________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI GOUTAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

DR (SMT) BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 

  WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.

 

SRI SAMIR GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA. 

 

 

 

C O U N S E L

 

 

For the O.P. 1 & 2 : Sri Nepal Majumder,

 

 

 

F I N A L    O R D E R

1. This case is filed by Sri Surajit Chowdhury of Ramnagar, Agartala(here-in-after called as “the Complianant”) U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the General Manager, TSECL, Bidyut Bhawan, Agartala(here-in-after called as the “O.P. No.1”) and the Sub-divisional Officer, TSECL, Durga Chowmuhani, Agartala (here-in-after called as the “O.P. No.2”) alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.

1.2 The case of the complainant in short is that the complainant possess a electricity line vide consumer no. 100110317923 in his name at his residence.  

1.3 In the month of December, 2021 electric bill was issued in his name showing unit consumption 2520 units for an amount of Rs.19,235/-. 

 

January 342 Rs.2,105.92

February 413 Rs.2,719.00

March 642 Rs.4,461.00

April 497 Rs.3,399.00

May 1112 Rs.8,026.00

June 783 Rs.5,628.00

July Rs.920.00

August Rs.720.00

September Rs.1019.00

October 136 Rs.730.00

November 2520 Rs.19,235.00

 

1.4 In the month of May, 2021 similar bill was issued by the O.P. showing huge electricity consumption by the complainant and the complainant complained about the same to the SDO, Durga Chowmuhani electric office but he was asked to pay the electricity bill first and assured that the employee of the O.P. will visit his residence and the check the meter but they never visited his residence. 

1.5 It is stated by the complainant that the meter  installed in his residence was stopped generating electric bill from the month of July, 2021 and the O.P. started issuing bill without visiting his residence and without checking the meter and the complainant paid the entire bill through Gpay except the disputed bill issued by the O.P. for the month of November, 2021. 

1.6 Finding no other alternative the complainant filed this complaint before this Commission for getting relief.

 

2. The O.P. appeared and resisted the case of the complainant denying the allegations made by the complainant in his complaint petition.

2.1 In the written version it is admitted by the O.P. that bill was generated and issued showing electricity consumption of 2520 for an amount of Rs.19,235/- for the period of 02.11.2021 to 10.12.2021 for the month of November, 2021. 

2.2 It is also stated that after installation of smart meters the reading were being collected through online and bills are generated since November, 2018. Since the smart grid system was out of order in the month of June, 2021 meter reading was collected manually for monthly energy billing. 

2.3 It is also stated by the O.P. that the energy billed amount from August to November, 2021 were less than the normal billing as a result a bill of larger amount generated in the month of December, 2021. The consumer was asked to write letter to the Senior Manager for meter testing to verify  the accuracy of the meter but no letter was received from the complainant.  

2.4 The O.P. raised bill as per actual unit of electricity consumption by the complainant and there is no deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. and the case is not maintainable. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

 

3. The complainant submitted evidence on affidavit. Complainant submitted electricity bills, Demand Notice issued to the O.P. 

3.1 On the other hand, O.P. also submitted evidence on  affidavit of Nirmal Debnath, Senior Manager, Durga Chowmuhani Electrical Sub- Division No.III. 

 

4. On the basis of the pleadings, documents and hearing the arguments of both side following points  emerged for discussion and decision:-

 

 

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DESCISION:-

5. All the points are taken up together for discussion and decision.

5.1 In Para -8 of the written objection the O.Ps admitted that there electronic billing system was out of order after installation of smart meters in them month of June, 2021. However, due to Covid Pandemic the consumer billing was also hampered and in the month of November, 2021 the billing condition improved after implementation of RMS i.e., the new billing system. The energy bill amount for the period August to November, 2021 were less than the normal billing. As such bill for larger amount was generated in the month of December, 2021. In fact this is the main area of dispute.

5.2 Since the O.Ps refused to accept payment leaving the disputed amount, the complainant preferred appeal before the Hon'ble State Commission in case No- A/16/2022 wherein Hon'ble State Commission vide order dated 04.07.2022 was pleased to direct that out of the total amount of Rs.44,000/- accommodated up to the month of June, 2022 the complainant shall pay Rs.30,000/- that is the admitted bill and a further sum of Rs.5,000/- out of the disputed bill amount. Accordingly, the complainant paid the amount of Rs.30,000/-.

5.3 Situated thus, the present disputed amount if Rs.19,235/- minus Rs.5,000/- = Rs.14,235/-. 

5.4 This Commission vide order dated 27.02.2023 directed the O.Ps to segregate the bill amount monthwise. Accordingly, the O.P. submitted the report dated 10.04.2023 showing 3117 units consumed from July to November, 2021. However, on calculation the O.P. segregated the bill for a span of 5 months i.e., 623 units per month and raised a total bill of Rs.21,320/- including energy charged meter rent etc. and  allowed the slab benefit for Rs.22,068/- i.e., the bill actually raised minus Rs.21,320/- = Rs.748/-. As such the outstanding bill remains Rs.14,235/- - Rs.748/- = Rs.13,487/-. The complainant fairly submitted that this disputed amount may be divided in 5/6 installments. This prayer is a genuine prayer. Accordingly, we allow this prayer. 

6. All the points are decided accordingly. 

 

7. In the result, it is ordered that the O.Ps shall allow 5 installments for Rs.13,487/- which shall be distributed with the next 5 months bill from the month of August, 2023 to December, 2023. The O.Ps shall also receive actual bill from the complainant as usual without further direction from this Commission from the month of August, 2023. 

8. The case stands disposed off. Supply copy of this Final Order free of cost to the parties.

 

Announced.

 

 

 

SRI  GOUTAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

 

DR (SMT)  BINDU  PAL

MEMBER, 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 

WEST TRIPURA,AGARTALA

 

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,AGARTALA.