C.F. CASE No.                     : CC/11/52                                                                                                                                                                  

COMPLAINANT                 :            Baidyanath Sarkar

                                                Prop. of M/s Sarkar Diesel

                                                Kadamtala,

                                                P.O. Badkulla, Dist. Nadia, W.B.

• Vs  –

OPPOSITE PARTIES/OPs:   1)      The S.S./Station Manager,

                                                            Badkulla C.C.C.

                                                            Badkulla Electric Supply,

                                                            W.B.S.E.D.C.L.,

                                                            P.O. Badkulla, P.S. Taherpur,  

                                                            Nadia.

                                                   2)      The D.E.

                                                            W.B.S.E.D.C.L.

                                                            Krishnagar, Nadia, W.B.

PRESENT                               :     SHRI KANAILAL CHAKRABORTY       PRESIDENT

                      :     SMT SHIBANI BHATTACHARYA       MEMBER

DATE OF DELIVERY                                             

OF  JUDGMENT                    :          29^th July,  2011

:    J U D G M E N T    :

            In brief, the case of the complainant is that he is a consumer under the OP having consumer No. A020143 and service connection No. BC1974.  It is his contention that on perusal of the yellow card and the electric bills it will be revealed that his electricity consumption cannot be more than 600 units per quarter.  But due to fault of the meter reader the total amount consumed by him in November, December, 10 and January, 11 has shown as 15286 units.  By a letter dtd. 04.05.11 the OP No. 1 intimated him that his meter was ok and claimed to pay the bill amount for the period of April – June’11 along with the unpaid units.  It is his submission that he never consumed such energy as claimed by the OP, nor the OP issued any revised bill in favour of the complainant, rather sent a notice on 25.05.11 threatening to disconnect the line if the bill amount was not paid within 30.05.11. So having no other alternative this case is filed praying for the reliefs as stated in the petition of complaint.

            The OPs have contested this case by filing a written version, inter alia, stating that the case is not maintainable in its present form and nature.  It is their submission that the complainant is a consumer who enjoyed electricity and paid all electric bills.  They also submit that there is no mistake on the part of the meter reader.  The total units of 15286 was duly noted in the yellow card as the complainant consumed the said units.  On examination, his meter was found ok.  So no question of issuing any revised bill in favour of the complainant for the above period, does arise.  Hence, the complainant has no cause of action to file this case and the same is liable to be dismissed against him.

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 OPs along with the annexed documents filed by the parties it is available on record that admittedly the complainant is a consumer under the OPs having consumer No. A020143.  The complainant’s only allegation is that the reading of the meter taken by the OP men on 18.01.11 is erroneous as it is shown that during that period he consumed 15286 units which is practically impossible.  So he has prayed for revised bill for the above said period.  In that bill total amount claimed by the OPs is Rs. 1,12,788/-.  At the time of argument ld. lawyer for the complainant submits that the complainant has accepted this bill as genuine and accordingly he has paid Rs. 10,000/- out of the claimed amount of Rs. 1,12,788/-.  His only prayer is to direct the OPs to allow the complainant to pay the due amount by easy monthly instalments along with the current monthly bills.  Ld. lawyer for the OPs raise no objection in granting instalments to the complainant to make payment of the arrear amount of Rs. 1,12,788/-.

            Therefore, after hearing the arguments advanced by the ld. lawyers for both the sides it appears to us that the complainant has accepted the bill amount of Rs. 1,12,788/- as due from him and out of this amount he has already paid Rs. 10,000/-.  So he has no cause of action to file this case and he is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.   In spite of that considering the facts of this case and the oral submission of ld. lawyer for the complainant, we direct the OPs to consider the prayer of the complainant to pay the arrear bills by easy monthly instalments if possible by 12 monthly instalments along with his current bills.  As the complainant has waived his claim, so he is not entitled to get the relief as prayed for.    In result the case fails.

Hence,

Ordered,

            That the case, CC/11/52 be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OPs without any cost.

Let a copy of this judgment be delivered to the parties free of cost.