West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/28/2016

D. Anand Rao - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Station Manager, W.B.S.E.D.C.L. - Opp.Party(s)

18 Apr 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

                             

Bibekananda Pramanik, President,

and

 Sagarika Sarkar, Member.

   

Complaint Case No.28/2016

 

             D. Anand Rao, S/O Late D. Rama Rao, Resident of Vill Gopalnagar Gaikata,                

             P.O. Kharagpur, P.S. Kharagpur (Town), District Paschim Medinipur...……Complainant.

                                                                              Vs.

1)The Station Manager, W.B.S.E.D.C.L., Kharagpur C.C.C., at Inda, P.O. Kharagpur, P.S. Kharagpur (Town), Dist. Paschim Medinipur,

2)The Chairman, W.B.S.E.D.C.L., at Bidyut Bhaban, Salt Lake City, Kolkata- 700091....……….….Opp. Parties.

                                                    

              For the Complainant: Mr.  Swapan Bjattacherjje, Advocate.

              For the O.P.               : Mr. Swapan Bhattacherjee, Advocate.

 

Decided on: -18/04/2017

                               

ORDER

                          Bibekananda Pramanik, President – Facts of the case, in brief, is that the complainant is a bona fide consumer of the O.P.-W.B.S.E.D.C.L. and his consumer ID number and meter numbers are 212112093 and B-3775813 respectively.  The said service of the complainant is for domestic purpose and the average unit of  such consumption is within 300 units in each three months.  The complainant is consuming the said electricity in his house since the month of January, 2011.  Suddenly, on 22/09/2012, the O.P. no.1 changed the original meter and installed a new electric meter in the premises of the complainant.  After installation of the new meter, the employee of the O.P. no.1 came to take reading of the meter first time on 06/11/2015 and endorsed the total unit as 184 units

Contd………………P/2

 

( 2 )

 in the yellow card.  Complainant paid the said amount of bill to the O.P. within due date.  Thereafter on 06/02/2016, the employee of the O.P. no.1 came to the premises of the complainant for taking meter reading and thereafter the O.P. no.1 issued the bill for the consumption period for November, 2015 to January, 2016.  After going through the said bill, the complainant became very much astonished as in the said bill, the total unit has been shown as 5246 and the bill amount as Rs.47,074/- for the consumption period from November, 2015 to January, 2016.  It is stated that actually the complainant consumed 300 units in each three month.  After receipt of the said bill, the complainant requested the O.P. to install a check meter in his premises to come to a conclusion as to whether the new installed meter is running as per actual consumption or if  the same is defective or not but the O.P.  refused to do so  and threatened the complainant that they would disconnect his service connection if the complainant does not pay the bill amount of first installment.  For such threatening, the complainant was compelled to pay the first installment amount with objection on 22/02/2016.  Complainant, on several times, met the O.P. no.1 and he requested them to rectify the bill dated 06/02/2016 and to issue proper electric bill as per consumption.  At first the O.P. no.1 assured the complainant to change the meter but ultimately he failed to keep his words.  Hence the complaint, praying for directing the O.P. to rectify the bill dated 06/02/2016 and to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation and a sum of Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost.

                  The opposite parties have contested this case by filling a written objection.     

                   Denying and disputing the case of the complainant, it is the specific case of the opposite parties that the present case is not maintainable,  the complainant has no  cause of action to file this case and that the allegations leveled against the O.P.s are all baseless and vague.  It is stated by the O.Ps. that the consumption of electricity was  recorded as per meter reading and the complaint is well aware about such meter reading.  O.Ps. submit that no scrap of paper has been filed to show that the complainant sent any letter or application regarding correction of the bill or installation of a check meter.  The complainant is a defaulter of huge amount of bill and as such this case has been filed before this Forum to avoid payment of such bill.  It is stated that the complainant never approached the O.P. for correction of the bill and if he would  approach, the matter could have been solved.  It is therefore stated by the O.Ps. that there is no deficiency in service on their part and the petition of complaint is therefore liable to be dismissed.

         To prove his case, the complainant D. Anand Rao has examined himself as PW-1 by tendering a written examination-in-chief, duly supported by affidavit and during his evidence, three documents were marked as exhibit 1 to 3 respectively.

Contd………………P/3

 

 

( 3 )

  On the other hand, O.P.-W.B.S.E.D.C.L. has not adduced any evidence but they have relied upon some documents, so filed by them.

                   

                                                                 Points for decision

1)Is the case maintainable in it’s present form and prayer?

2)Is the case barred by limitation?

3)Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

4)Is the complainant entitled to get the reliefs, as sought for?    

                    

Decision with reasons

 

       For the sake of convenience and brevity, all the above points are taken up together for consideration.

      Admittedly, the complainant is a consumer of electricity in respect of his domestic electric connection under the O.P.  Maintainability of this case on the points of law has not been disputed at the time of hearing.  Now the question arises as to whether the O.Ps have any deficiency in service in respect of the said electric service connection of the complainant, as alleged.  According to the complainant  he consumed average unit of about 300 in each three months since January, 2011.  Subsequently on 22/09/2012, the O.P. no.1 changed the original electric meter and installed a new meter in his premises.  After installation of that new meter, the employee of the O.P. no.1  took meter reading for the first time on 6/11/2015 and endorsed the total unit as 184 in the yellow card.  The complainant paid the said amount of such consumption to the O.P. within due date.  Thereafter the O.P. no.1 issued a electric bill for consumption period for the month of November, 2015 to January, 2016 vide bill dated 6/2/2016 and after going through the said bill, the complainant became astonished to see that  consumption of unit has been shown as 5246 units and the bill amount has been claimed for such consumption of a sum of Rs.47,074/-.  It is alleged that after going through that bill, the complainant met the O.P. no.1 on 8/2/2016 and requested him to install a check meter in his premises for ascertaining as to whether the newly installed meter was running as per consumption or if the same is defective but the O.P. no.1 refused to do so and threatened that the service connection of the complainant will be discontinued if the complainant fails to pay the first installment.  Finding no other alternative, the complainant paid the first installment with objection on 22/2/2016 but even thereafter, the O.P. no.1 neither rectified the said bill nor installed any check meter.  Thus it appears that

Contd………………P/4

 

 

( 4 )

the complainant has alleged that there was deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. in not installing any check meter  for ascertaining the correctness of the disputed bill.  In their w.o., the O.Ps have stated that the complainant produced no scrap of paper to show that he sent any letter or application for correction of the disputed bill or for installation of a check meter.

               From the cross-examination of PW-1, the complainant, we find that he has admitted that a check meter was installed in his house and after installation of the check meter, the electric bill was sent but he has not paid the said bill amount.  The report of installation of such check meter has been filed by the O.P. during trial of this case and at the time of hearing of argument, Ld. Lawyer for the O.P. had drawn our attention to that report dated 28/12/2016 submitted by AE and SM, Kharagpur CCC, W.B.S.E.D.C.L.  From that report, it appears that the reading of the actual meter and the challenging meter (Check meter) are very closed to each other.  In that view of the matter, it cannot be said that there was any defects in the electric meter in question of the complainant and that the O.P. sent any excessive electric bill to the complainant.  Since it appear that the O.P. had already installed check meter for ascertaining correctness of the disputed bill and for testing the disputed electric meter, so it also cannot be held that there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.-W.B.S.E.D.C.L. in  not installing the check meter, as alleged in the petition of complaint.  It is therefore held that there in no deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.-W.B.S.E.D.C.L.

All the points are accordingly decided.

In the result, the complaint case fails.  

                                                  Hence, it is,

                                                     Ordered,

                                                            that the complaint case no.28/2016  is hereby dismissed on contest but in the circumstances without cost.

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

           Dictated & corrected by me

                 Sd/-B. Pramanik.                    Sd/- S. Sarkar                 Sd/-B. Pramanik.

                    

                       President                             Member                             President 

                                                                                                       District Forum

                                                                                                    Paschim Medinipur