Tripura

West Tripura

CC/68/2016

Smt. Ranjita Debbarma Prop. Of Tandoor Hut. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Secretary, The State Of Tripura & Others. - Opp.Party(s)

Mr.A.K.Pal.

20 Jan 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

CASE   NO:   CC- 68 of 2016 

Smt. Ranjita Debbarma,
Proprietor of Tandoor Hut,
Bijoy Kumar Chowmuhani,
Charu Kuthir, P.O. Agartala,
P.S. West Agartala,
Agartala, West Tripura.        ..…..…...Complainant.

               VERSUS

1. The State of Tripura,
Represented by the Secretary,
Power Department, Government of Tripura,
Capital Complex, Kunjaban, P.O. Kunjaban,
Agartala, West Tripura.    

2. The Chairman-cum Managing Director,
Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited,
Bidyut Bhavan, Bodhjung Chowmuhani,
Agartala, West Tripura.

3. The General Manager,
Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited,
Bidyut Bhavan, Bodhjung Chowmuhani,
Agartala, West Tripura.

4. The Deputy General Manager,
    Tripura State Electricity Corporation Limited,
Bidyut Bhavan, Bodhjung Chowmuhani,
Agartala, West Tripura.

5. The Senior Manager,
Electrical Sub-Division No.III,
Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd.,
Durga Chowmuhani, P.O. Ramnagar,
Agartala, West Tripura.        ............Opposite parties.

                 __________PRESENT__________
 SRI A. PAL,
PRESIDENT,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER  
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

SMT. Dr. G. DEBNATH
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

SRI U. DAS
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

C O U N S E L

    For the Complainant    : Sri Anajan Kanti Pal,
                      Advocate.
                     
    For the O.Ps            : Sri Pradip Chakraborty,
                      Advocates.

 

        JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON:   20.01.2017

J U D G M E N T
        This case arises on the petition filed by one Ranjita Debbarma U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. Petitioner's case in short is that she had taken power connection in her Restaurant namely Tandoor Hut. After few months she noticed that excess and high bill for consumption of electricity was given. The bill for the month 21.01.16 was Rs.3,531/- and thereafter Rs.3,178/-, thereafter it was Rs.4,851/-. The power bills comes to Rs.12,699/- and thereafter it was Rs.13,372/- in the month of June-July. Complainant reported on 30.04.16 about this excessive billing. Also verbally requested to O.P. No.5, Senior Manager, Electrical Sub-Division, Durga Chowmuhani for changing the meter. But no step was taken in this regard. On 16.07.16 bill was given for Rs.49,861/- with arrear bill Rs.35,778/-. Petitioner was unable to pay such huge amount.  She is aggrieved by the inaction of Opposite parties. She therefore prayed for compensation and direction to change the meter. She also claimed compensation Rs.3 lakhs. 

2.        O.P. Tripura State Electricity Board appeared, filed W.S denying the claim. It is stated that no excessive billing was done. The application for replacement is given in the month of April 2016. After that no payment was made in respect of electricity consumption. It is stated that the complaint is not maintainable in its present form. She is to make payment of the bill at first. 

3.        On the basis of contention raised by the parties following points cropped up for determination:
        (I) Whether the billing was correct or incorrect?
        (II) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get compensation for deficiency of service by the O.Ps?

 4.        Petitioner side produced some bills and original prayer, money receipt.
5.        O.P. produced photo copy of letter dated 17.05.16, 01.06.16, 04.09.16 and the bill dated 17.10.16. 

6.        On the basis of all these we shall now determine the above points.
        Findings and decision;
7.         In the course of argument the learned advocate for opposite party, Tripura State Electricity Board, Mr. Pradip Chakraborty submits that 50% of the total bill should be paid by the petitioner at first. Thereafter they will consider in respect of payment of rest 50% amount. The method of calculating the correct consumption however not projected before us. We have gone through some bills as produced. It is found that the consumption was 4000 to 6000 unit level in the month of January, February, March. In the month of April to November it was from 10000 to 15,000 unit. It has come down from 4000 to 6000 again from January to March. Thereafter, it was again raised to 2000 and above. According to Senior Manager, Electrical Sub-Division No.III, meter was working properly. Charge of the electricity was higher when the meter reading and consumption is higher. We have gone through the bills. Fix charge is written  800 in every bill. We have examined the bill from 13.08.16 to 13.10.16. The bill was given for Rs.49,707/-. In this 2 months total electricity consumption is shown 5368 unit and its charge was Rs.39,615/-. Again this Fix charge was imposed without any reason. Fix charge is generally imposed when there was no consumption. But when consumption was higher then why again Rs.800 was imposed not clarified. Last payment was for Rs.4851/- on 23.03.16 and thereafter consumer did not pay any amount.  In the bill dated 12.07.16 to 12.08.16 again fix charge 400 is imposed. Total electricity consumption was 391 unit. Surcharge was Rs.964.68/-. In the month of 03.08.14 to 26.08.14 total unit consumption was 200. So it appears that the consumption of electricity was 5368 in  2 months during 13.08.16 to 13.10.16 is excessive and had no similarity with the average consumption. With the arrears payment petitioner was supposed to pay Rs.93,100/- in 13.10.16.

8.         From the scrutiny of all these bills it is found that sometimes excessive billing is done and sometimes normal billing. Generally there is no possibility of higher billing in winter season. 600 unit shown in one month then consumption of 53 unit on 12.07.16 to 12.08.16 then it is found very much excessive in respect of consumption of 5368 unit in 2 months from 13.08.16 to 13.10.16. O.P. TSECL failed to give any cogent reason for this excessive billing in this month. So, therefore proper checking and reconsideration is necessary. 
         
 9.        We have examined all the bills and found that in this 2 months as mentioned above there was excessive billing. Petitioner filed application before the State Electricity Board for changing of the meter but the formalities in respect of changing of meter was not done by them. Senior Manager O.P. also did not give definite direction to her in respect of changing the meter. Up to April 2016 she did not make any complaint. Therefore she is to pay the bill up to April 2016. After April 2016 she is to pay 50% of the consumption bill as proposed by the learned advocate. Tripura State Electricity corporation Limited is to give her rebate and waive the surcharge and fix charge imposed upon her. On careful scrutiny of evidence on record and bills we direct the O.P. to accept the 50% of the consumed bill from April 2016 onwards and direct the complainant to pay consumption bill up to April 2016. 

10.        From the careful scrutiny of the evidence we found some deficiency of service by the O.P. We therefore direct  the O.P.  to pay compensation of Rs.5000/- to the petitioner and Rs.1000/- as cost of litigation. Both the points are decided accordingly.

11.        In view of our above findings over the two points we direct the O.P. to receive 50% of the consumed bill  of the petitioner from April, 2016 onwards and also deduct the fix charge and surcharge from the bill and thereafter prepare fresh bill for period after April, 2016 onwards. Complainant is to pay the consumed bill up to April 2016, clear it immediately and also pay 50% of the claimed amount in this time. O.P. is to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation + Rs.1000/- as cost of litigation to the petitioner. Case disposed of accordingly.          
                 
                       Announced.

SRI A. PAL
PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM,
WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH,
MEMBER,
 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM, 
WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA    SRI U. DAS
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.