DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR,
KOLKATA-700 0144
C.C. CASE NO. __150_ _ OF ___2017
DATE OF FILING :_29.11.2017 DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 11.4.2019
Present : President : Ananta Kumar Kapri
Member(s) : Jhunu Prasad
COMPLAINANT : Prabir Kumar Mondal, son of late Kalipada Mondal of Village Kaikhali, P.O Kaikhali Bolinchbati under P.S Falta, Pin-743398.
O.P/O.Ps : The Station Manager, Falta Customer Care Centre, at Village & P.O Sahararhat , P.S Falta, Dist. South 24-Parganas, Pin-743504.
_________________________________________________________________
J U D G M E N T
Sri Ananta Kumar Kapri, President
Facts leading to the filing of the instant case may be epitomized as follows.
Complainant is a consumer of electricity, having domestic connection ID no. 101787759 , Meter no. BR177097 . The complainant has all along paid electric charges as demanded from time to time by way of bills raised by O.P, though the bills are not raised and sent on regular basis. His average consumption units vary from 350 to 400 units per quarter. One fine morning, to his utter surprise, he i.e the complainant received a bill dated 19.1.2017 (Billing date) amounting to Rs.10,791/- for the month of February, March and April 2017. This is an inflated bill as goes the allegation of the complainant and, therefore, the complainant has filed the instant case ,praying for passing an order directing the O.P to supply revised bills and to pay compensation for harassment and mental agony caused to him. Hence, this case.
The O.P has been contesting the case by filing written statement, wherein it is stated by him that the meter reader visited the house of the complainant and took the meter reading regularly. But, that reading was not recorded in meter card of the complainant. So, every bill was generated in regular manner and handed over to the complainant. The disputed bill dated 19.1.2017 was raised on the basis of reading taken on 6.1.2016 (Mistakenly written 16.1.2016 in evidence) and the reading on 1.4.2015 over 1264 units ( 2266 units – 1002 units) and it is correctly made as per Regulations. There is no deficiency in service on his part and, therefore, the case should be dismissed in limini.
Upon the averments of the parties, the following points are formulated for consideration.
POINT FOR DETERMINATION
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P as alleged by the complainant?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief or reliefs as prayed for ?
EVIDENCE OF THE PARTIES
The petition of complaint is treated as evidence of the complainant vide his petition dated 19.3.2018. The O.P has led evidence on affidavit and the same is kept in the record after consideration.
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point no.1 & 2 :
Already heard the submissions of Ld. Lawyers appearing for both the parties. Perused the petition of complaint, written statement and the documents on record. Considered all these.
It is the allegation of the complainant that the disputed bill dated 19.1.2017 was not raised by the O.P in accordance with the Regulations. According to the complainant, meter reading was not taken by the O.P and without taking meter reading; they raised the disputed bill arbitrarily.
On the other hand, it is the version of the O.P that the bill was raised in accordance with the Regulations and that there is no deficiency in service on their part in so far as the preparation of the said bill is concerned.
It is the version of the O.P that the bill was raised on 19.1.2017 on the basis of meter reading on 1.4.2015 and 6.1.2016. It is admitted by the O.P in the written statement that the disputed bill was raised on the basis of meter reading taken on 1.4.2015 and 6.1.2016. This version of the O.P clearly establishes that the disputed bill was raised on past meter reading taken by the department of the O.P. The O.p cannot raise the bill on the basis of past meter reading. The meter is running correctly and there is no defect in the meter. The disputed bill itself proves that the meter reader did not take the meter reading on regular basis and, therefore, the O.P was compelled to raise the disputed bill on the basis of past meter reading. Regulation 3.1.1 lays down that the result of recording of meter shall be recorded on card or a book or any other similar documents which shall be kept where the meter is located and in case of spot billing, there is no need to note down the meter reading on any card. Regulation 3.1.3 lays down that the bill is to be raised on the basis of meter reading which may be monthly, by-monthly or quarterly, as the case may be.
Coming to the facts of the instant case, it stands established that the disputed bill dated 19.1.2017 was not raised by the O.P in accordance with the Regulations; he raised the bill arbitrarily on the basis of meter reading taken on 6.1.2016 & 1.4.2015. This, he cannot do. To act without any regard to the Regulation is a kind of imperfection in discharge of duty and, therefore, the O.P is held to be guilty of deficiency in service in so far as the raising of disputed bill is concerned. There is ample truth in the allegation of the complainant and, therefore, the complainant is deemed to be entitled to relief or reliefs as prayed for.
Hence,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is decreed on contest against the O.P with a cost of Rs.10,000/-.
The disputed bill with billing date 19.1.2017 is hereby cancelled and the O.P is directed to raise revised bill for that period strictly in accordance with the Regulations of the Department and to hand over the same to the complainant for payment of the same.
The complainant is directed to make payment of the bill within 15 days of receipt of the same; otherwise the O.P is at liberty to act in accordance with the Law.
At the same time, the O.P is also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- as compensation to the complainant for harassment and mental agony suffered by the complainant due to his arbitrary act , within a month of this order ,failing which, the compensation amount and the cost amount will bear interest @8% p.a till full realization thereof.
Registrar-In-Charge of this Forum is directed to deliver a copy of the judgment free of cost to the parties concerned.
President
I / We agree
Member
Dictated and corrected by me
President
