In the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Murshidabad

Berhampore, Murshidabad.

Case No. CC/87 /2015

Date of filing: 11/08/2015                                                                Date of Final Order: 03/03/2016

Shakti pada@ Shastipada Das.

S/O-Ponuar Das @Bonowari Das.

Vill.-Mirzapur, P.O.- Fatehpur.

P.S.-Burwan.Dist- Murshidabad.                                                                               

                                  - Vs-

Station  Manager,

Panchpthupi Customer Care Centre,W.B.S.E.D.C.L,

Vill.&P.O.- Panchthupi,P.S.-Burwan.Dist.- Murshidabad.

PIN-742161.(W.B.)                                          …………….……….  Opposite Party

Mr.Arindam Banerjee. Ld. Adv.....………………………….……………for the complainant.

            Mr.SiddharthaSankarDhar Ld. Adv……………………………………….for the Opposite Party.

                    Present: s                        Hon’ble President, Anupam Bhattacharyya.           

                                                              Hon’ble Member, Samaresh Kumar Mitra.

                                                              Hon’ble Member, Pranati Ali.

FINAL ORDER

Samaresh KumarMitra,Member.

By filing this complaint u/s 12 of the C. P. Act 1986, the complainant prays for an order directing the OP to reconnect the electric meter of the complainant immediately and further to pay compensation for harassment and mental agony.

                The case of the complainant, in brief, is that he is a consumer under the OP having agriculture connection being Consumer I.D. No. 313101391. He is consuming power for the functioning of Shallow Tube-well to irrigate his land and paying electric bills regularly before the OP. That in the month of Jan.2014 he was wrongfully charged with theft of electricity u/s.135 (1)(a)of Indian Electricity Act,2003.but the said case has been disposed by the Ld. Spl.Court,, Murshidabad at Berhampore discharging the complainant and thereafter the WBSEDCL sent Electricity bill to the complainant directing the complainant to pay outstanding dues of Rs.37081.00 for the period May.2013 to Aug.2013, March 2014 to June 2013 and Aug.2014 dated 15.09.2014. That in the month of September,2014 WBSEDCL sent a notice of disconnection to the complainant on failure to pay the above mentioned impugned bill. Complainant informed WBSEDCL about the mistake made in the impugned bill but no proper step was taken on the part of the OP and sending bills with wrongly added increasing outstanding amount. That, on March,2015 the OP disconnected the agricultural connection of the complainant and a new bill was sent to the complainant with outstanding amount despite of disconnection on May.2015. The complainant averred that the OP erroneously charged with theft of electricity and imposed fine and continuously sending bills with wrongfully added amount..As a consequence he suffered loss and mental agony for which he preferred the recourse of this Forum for redressal.

                 The OP appeared by its advocate and filed written version in which he denied the allegations as leveled against him and averred that the complainant is a consumer under WBSEDCL having consumer ID No.313101391 and this OP ledged a FIR under I.E.Act and a case was started against him but he was discharged from the Special Court at Murshidabad. So the final assessment bill is under process and shall be rectified soon. He further averred that due to nonpayment of outstanding due of Rs.22084. for the month of 03/2014 to 03/2015 the said power connection has been disconnected and after disconnection three bills were generated by this OP and that bill shall also be rectified soon. As the complainant never suffered any financial loss due to the act of this OP, so present allocation is liable to be rejected.  

               The argument as advanced by the advocates of the parties heard in full. The advocate on behalf of the complainant assailed that the complainant is harassed by the OP for implicating the complainant falsely in a criminal case, so exemplary compensation is required for that. The advocate on behalf of the OP by producing a few documents tried to establish that the OP was not deficient in providing service towards the complainant and objected to the compensation as prayed by the complainant.  

From the discussion herein above, we find the following Issues/Points for consideration.

ISSUES/POINTS   FOR   CONSIDERATION

1). Whether the Complainant is a ‘Consumer’ of the Opposite Party?

 2).Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?

3).Whether the OPs carried on unfair trade practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the       Complainant?

4).Whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?

DECISION WITH REASONS

   In the light of discussions here in above we find that the issues/points should be decided based on the above perspectives.

(1).Whether the Complainantis a ‘Consumer’ of the opposite party?

     From the materials on record it is transparent that the Complainant is a “Consumer” as provided by the spirit of section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986. As the complainant herein is enjoying electricity supplied by the OP Company and it is admitted by the OP Company being the service provider.

     (2).Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?

                Both the complainant and opposite party are residents/carrying on business within the district of Murshidabad. The complaint valued within Rs.20,00,000/- limit of this Forum. So, this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case.                

    (3).Whether the opposite party carried on Unfair Trade Practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?

             The opposite party being the largest Electric Supply Company throughout the state having a  lot of offices, power stations, substations and power generating stations decorated with a lot of expert hands and running its business with goodwill for a long period and providing/rendering service for development of society as well as implementing a lot of Govt. programs. So the role of OP Company for the development of the society is unquestionable.

                The O.P. herein is the Station Manager of an office of the largest electric supply company throughout the State of W.B. The Company WBSEDCL running its business throughout the state except territorial jurisdiction of Kolkata Corporation. The O.P. Company is providing power in the rural areas in different projects for a long period. That is why the consumers in the rural areas are highly grateful to the Company. While providing powers throughout the state it also suffers from many discrepancies. Like not sending/ preparing bills in due time or sending bills for a period when the powers are discontinued and not taking reading regularly as a result the consumers suffers from paying accumulated units at a higher rate. As a consequence the consumers suffer a lot and make their grievances for remedy.

       After perusing the case record it appears that the complainant was falsely been implicated in the charge of pilferage of energy by the OP. So, the OP during the period of final assessment dated 02,2014 assessed the energy charge &others as Rs.34,454.45. While assessing the bill the OP took the multiple principle for offences. From the order of Ld. Special Court, Msd it appears that the complainant was falsely been implicated in a criminal case arising out of Burwan P.S. Case No.-45/14,u/s-135(1) (a) of I.E.Act,2003 and Ld. Court in its order rebuked the OP for mistake . Not only the complainant was implicated in the criminal case but also the OP charged a huge amount from its consumer by the name of final assessment. The complainant suffered loss, mental pain and agony for the act of the OP.

       It appears from the bill payment receipt dated 26.3.2014 that the consumer deposited a sum of Rs.16898. in cash for the consumption period 01-2013 to 02-2014 and he also deposited a sum of Rs.100 for disconnection and reconnection charge. The notice u/s-56 (i) of Indian Electricity Act,2003 of OP dated 05.09.2014 reflects that a sum of Rs.35493.is outstanding due for the consumption period May,2013- Aug.2013, Mar.2014- July 2014. The bill payment receipt of the complainant is documentary evidence issued by the OP after getting payment. So the OP cannot deny such payment and it is not denied by the OP in its W/V. The OP herein is demanding twice from this complainant. The bill dated 26.3.2014 also reflects that due to pilferage of energy (direct hooking) the OP assessed bill for the period 08/2013 to 01/2014 amounting to Rs.33301. and it is also pertinent to mention that the final assessment bill for the said pilferage of energy is Rs.34454.45. The charge of pilferage of energy did not lie against this complainant as per order of the Ld.Judge of Special Court, Murshidabad at Berhampore. So the liability of the complainant has no existence for the disputed period. The complainant is liable to pay the bill dated 15.9.2014 of Rs.1588.46& bill dated 13.5.2015 of Rs.1588.46excluding the outstanding dues amounting to Rs.37081.46. Not a scrap of paper is produced by the complainant in relation to payment of bill for that period. The bill dated 13.5.2015 also reflects that outstanding amount is soaring due to nonpayment but the average bill has prepared for the consumption of 402 units. In the W/V the OP demanded a sum of Rs.22084 as outstanding dues for the month of 03-2014 to 03-2015. He assailed that due to nonpayment of bills electric connection of the complainant disconnected and after disconnection three bills were generated by this OP and those bills shall be rectified soon. But till date no rectified bills produced by the parties for coming into just decision. The OP failed to produce bills for the relevant consumption period for which he is demanding Rs.22084. So we may come into this conclusion that the demand of the OP is not cogent & at per.

The inaction/negligence/ discrepancies of the O.P. Company tantamount to deficiency of service for which the consumers are suffering a lot.

4). Whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?

            The discussion made herein before, we have no hesitation to come in a conclusion that the complainant is able to prove his case. So the Opposite Party is under liability to accept the bill amount of Rs.3177.00 and reconnect the power connection of the complainant after getting the stipulated amount fixed by this Forum.

  Hence it is ordered that the ComplaintCase No.87/2015 be and the same is allowed in part on contest against the Opposite party with a direction to the OP to accept the disputed bill dated 15.09.2014&13.5.2015 amounting to Rs.3177.in total excluding the outstanding amountand after getting the said amount reconnect the power connection of the complainant within 15 days from receiving the amount.

 The complainant is also directed to pay the total billamount of Rs.3177.00 within 15 days from receiving this order.

The current bills after the reconnection are to be prepared in accordance with the reading as reflected in the meter card. The OP should take appropriate steps so that the consumer should not meet such a liability to pay bills of huge accumulated units and disconnection for nonpayment of such bills.

No other reliefs are awarded to the complainant.

 At the event of failure to comply with the order the Opposite Party shall pay cost @ Rs.50/- for each day’s delay, if caused, on expiry of the aforesaid 30 days by depositing the accrued amount, if any,  in the fund of  “ Consumer Legal Aid Account”.

Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied free of cost to the parties/their Ld. Advocates/Agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/sent by ordinary post forthwith, for information & necessary action.

           Dictated and corrected by me.