West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/188/2017

Manoranjan Ghosh - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Station Manager/ Assistant Engineer Amlagora C.C.C. - Opp.Party(s)

Subrata Das

11 Apr 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

                             

   Bibekananda Pramanik, President,

Pulak Kumar Singha, Member

and

Sagarika Sarkar, Member.

Complaint Case No.188/2017

             Manoranjan Ghosh, S/o Late Sambhu Ghosh of Bankata, P.O. Amsole, P.S.Garhbeta,

             District - Paschim Medinipur.  

                                                                                                                    ………..……Complainant.

                                                                              Vs.

             The Station Manager/ Assistant Engineer, Amlagora C.C.C., P.O. Amlagara, P.S. Garhbeta,

             District- Paschim Medinipur.

                                                                                                 .....……….….Opp. Party.                                                    

              For the Complainant: Mr. Subrata Das, Advocate.

              For the O.P.               : Mr. Swapan Kumar Bhattacharjee, Advocate.

                                                         

                                                           Date of filing:27.11.2017.

Decided on: - 11 /04/2018

                               

ORDER

                          Bibekananda Pramanik, President –This consumer complaint u/s 12 of the C.P. Act has been filed by the complainant Sri Monoranjan Ghosh against the O.P., named above, alleging deficiency in service on their part.

                Complainant’s case, in brief, is as follows:-

                The complainant has landed property within the jurisdiction of this forum and for the purpose of cultivation of his lands, he took electric service connection from the O.P. for his mini tube well and he also used to pay electric bill to the O.P. according to the meter-reading.  The O.P. thereafter sent an excessive electric bill for which the complainant made a complaint before the O.P. in the year 2013 but the O.P. disconnected electric service connection on 23.09.2013 thereby claiming an outstanding amount of Rs.34,478/-.  It is also stated that at the time of disconnection, meter reading was 50980 units.  Thereafter the complainant requested the O.P. to reconnect his service connection

                                                                                                                                                    Contd……………………P/2

                                                 

                                                                                                 ( 2 )

and being so requested, the O.P. directed the complainant to deposit Rs.34,478/- along with security deposit of Rs.15,000/- and reconnection charge of Rs.100/-.  Accordingly the complainant deposited the said amount on 19.12.2015 and the O.P. reconnected his service connection on 13.01.2016 by endorsing meter  reading as 87766 units although at the time of disconnection on 30.09.2013 meter reading was 50980 units.  It is stated that during the period from 01.10.2013 to 12.01.2016 there was no electric service connection in his said meter.  After such reconnection on 13.01.2016, the O.P. sent a electric bill dated 18.01.2016 claiming an amount of Rs.1,80,378/- for 36786 units.  After receiving the said bill,  complainant submitted a written representation before the O.P. with request to rectify such illegal bill.  In spite of several representation, the O.P. did not pay any heed and on 30.06.2016, they also disconnected the service connection of the complainant and directed the complainant to deposit Rs.40,000/- with the assurance that after receiving such amount, they will rectify the bill.  Finding no other alternative, the complainant was compelled to deposit Rs.40,000/- and reconnection charge of Rs.100/- on 2.11.2016.  After such deposit, O.P. reconnected the service connection but they did not rectify the said bill.  It is stated that the O.P. has no right to claim such amount but the O.P. has been threatening the complainant to disconnect his service connection.  Finally O.P. has disconnected the service connection on 30.11.2011.  Hence the complaint, praying for directing the O.P. to reconnect the service connection and to declare the bill dated 18.01.2016 as illegal and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation and Rs.25,000/- as litigation cost.

                  Opposite party has contested this case by filling a written version.  

                  Denying and disputing the case of the complainant, it is the specific case of the opposite party that due to non-payment of energy bill, the electric service connection of the complainant was disconnected on 30.09.2013 as per rules and the said service installation became “deemed disconnected” and the deemed meter was not dismantled from the premises of the complainant and the energy meter was also kept at SMV room of the complainant.  After receiving application from the complainant, his said connection was subsequently restored.  On basis of a complaint of the complainant, an inspection was held by the O.P. on 13.01.2016 and it was found that the energy meter was all right. Again on 11.10.2017, an inspection was held and the energy meter was found okay.  According to the O.P., since the deemed meter was in the premises of the complainant, so it can be presumed that the complainant unauthorizedly restored the service cable by his own arrangement during such long period of disconnection.  It is stated that O.S.D. energy bill of Rs.1,49,740/- is still lying unpaid by the complainant and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.  O.P. therefore claims dismissal of the case with cost.  

                                                                                                                                                    Contd…………………P/3

                                                 

                                                                                                  ( 3 )

                    To prove his case, the complainant Monoranjan Ghosh has examined his son Santanu Ghosh as PW-1 by tendering a written examination-in chief and during his evidence, few documents were marked as exhibit 1 to 4 respectively.   On the other hand, O.P. adduced no evidence. 

                                                              Points for decision

1. Is the case maintainable in it’s present form and prayer?
2. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
3. Is the complainant entitled to get the reliefs, as sought for?    

                   

Decision with reasons

             Point no.1:-

Maintainability of this case has not been questioned by any of the parties at the time of final hearing of this case.  On perusal of the pleadings of the parties we do not find anything to hold that the case is not maintainable.

This point is therefore decided in the affirmative and in favour of the complainant.

             Point no.2:-

Admittedly the complainant is consumer of the O.P. having his electric service connection in his mini tube well for agricultural purpose.  Facts remain undisputed that due to non-payment of electric bill, the O.P. disconnected the said service connection on 23.09.2013 claiming an outstanding energy bill of Rs.34,478/- and at the time of such disconnection, meter reading was 50980 units.  Admittedly on prayer of the complainant, said service connection was restored on 13.01.2016 on deposit of Rs.34,478/- along with security deposit of Rs.15,000/- and reconnection charge of Rs.100/-. It is alleged by the complainant that at the time of such reconnection on 13.01.2016, the O.P endorsed meter reading as 87766 units most illegally although there was no service connection during the period from 01.10.2013 to 12.01.2016.  Grievance of the complainant is that thereafter the O.P. sent an excessive bill dated 18.01.2016 of Rs.1,80,378/- for consumption of 36786 units.  According to the complainant for non-payment of said excessive bill, his service connection was again disconnected on 30.06.2016 and the complainant was compelled to deposit Rs.40,000/- for reconnection.  Again the O.P. has started demanding payment of said excessive bill amount and ultimately they have disconnected the service connection on 23.11.2017. By filing the present complaint, the complainant has prayed for a declaration that the bill dated 18/01/2016 is illegal and the O.P. is not entitled to get any amount on basis of that bill. According to the complainant during the said period of disconnection from 01/10/2013 to 12/01/2016 there was no service connection and the complainant had not consumed electricity within that period but at the time of  reconnection on 13/01/2016 the

                                                                                                                                                    Contd……………………P/4

                                                

                                                                                             ( 4 )

O.P. most illegally noted meter-reading as 87766 units although at the time of disconnection on 30/09/2013 meter reading was noted as 50980 units. So admittedly at the time of disconnection on 30/09/2013 meter-reading was 50980 and  on the date of reconnection on 13/01/2016  meter-reading was found to be 87766 units. According to the O.P., for non-payment of electric bill, the service connection of the complainant became “deemed disconnected” on 30/09/2013 and the deemed meter was not dismantled from the premises of the complainant and the energy meter was kept at SMP room of the consumer. Further according to the O.P. in such circumstances, it can be clearly presumed that the complainant himself restored the service cable unauthorizedly by his own arrangement. Complainant has not denied that the electric meter is question was not dismantled from his premises and energy meter was kept at his SMP room.   In such circumstances and since the complainant has not claimed that the meter in question    has any defect and since the complainant has not prayed for examination of the electric meter by an expert, so we find substance in the case of the O.P. that during the period of disconnection from 1/10/2013 to 12/01/2016 the complainant unauthorizedly consumed electricity from his said deemed service connection by his own arrangement for which the meter-reading was enhanced to 87766 units from 50980 units. Therefore we find no reasons to hold that the O.P. has any deficiency in service and that the disputed bill dated 18/01/2016 is illegal and without basis.      

                   This point is accordingly decided against the complainant.

            Point no. 3:

                    In view of our above findings in point no. 2, the question of

           deficiency in service does not arise and the complainant is not entitled to get any reliefs,

           as prayed for. 

                    This point is therefore decided in the negative and against the

           complainant.

                    All the points are accordingly disposed of.

                     In the result, the complaint case fails.

                                                    Hence, it is,

                                                       Ordered,

                           that the complaint case no.188/2017  is hereby dismissed on contest but in the circumstances without cost.  All interim orders accordingly stands vacated.

                               Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

                Dictated and Corrected by me

                    Sd/-B. Pramanik.             Sd/-P.K. Singha           Sd/- S. Sarkar             Sd/-B. Pramanik. 

                        President                         Member                      Member                       President

                                                                                                                                District Forum

                                                                                                                              Paschim Medinipur