Date of Filing: 06-05-2016                                    Date of Final Order: 27-06-2017

Sri Debangshu Bhattacharjee, Member.

The brief facts of the complaint as culled out from the record is that the Complainant, Arun Chandra Debnath, S/O. Lt. Manindra Chandra Debnath, being consumer of domestic electric connection having Meter No. L3137310, enjoying the electricity in his house with his family from the O.Ps dated 26.12.2013. The complainant received his first electric bill on 23.10.2014 consisting of 2173 units of meter reading. Consecutively the complainant has received electric bills dated 01/01/2015 consisting 2152 units and on 10/04/2015 consisting 2208 units. The complainant deposited the total amount for the aforesaid bills to the O.P-No-I. On dated 10/11/2014 and 13/01/2015 the complainant wrote letters to the O.P-No-I to rectify the peculiar bill. The O.P-No-I received the same with seal and date. After that from  15/07/2015 the electric meter stopped functioning. The complainant wrote another letter dated 10/08/2015 to the O.P-No-I to rectify the previous bill and change the stopped electric meter. The defective meter of the complainant was replaced by new one on 05/11/2015. (Meter No.3557633). The Complainant also send Legal Notice to the O.P-No-I But till date the OP did not make any responds. The complainant also furnished a complainant regarding this matter to the Assistant Director of Consumer Affairs and FBP, Cooch Behar Regional Office. O.P-No-I received the notice on 15/02/16. But the dispute was not solved.   

Due to such activities of the O.Ps, the Complainant had been suffering from mental pain & agony and harassment. The O.Ps also adopted their deficiency in service and they are liable to issue correct bill against the Complainant and also to pay all damages and loss to the Complainant.             

Hence, the Complainant filed the instant case with enclosed relevant documents before this Forum and prayed for direction to the O.Ps (1) For the rectification of peculiar bills and proper arrangement of his electrical connection (2) Rs.20, 000/- as compensation for mental pain & agony and harassment and (3) Rs.50, 000/- for deficiency in service against the Complainant, besides other relief(s) as the Forum deem fit, as per law & equity.

It appears that in spite of due service of notice O.P. No.2, S.E, W.B.S.E.D.C.L., Cooch Behar Division, Cooch Behar did not appear before the Forum and accordingly the case was heard Ex-parte. 

The O.P. No-I the Station Manager, W.B.S.E.D.C.L., Khagrabari, Cooch Behar has contested the case by filing written version denying all material allegation of the complaint contending inter-alia that the case is not maintainable and the Complainant has no cause of action to bring the case. The main contention of the O.P is that the claim petition is liable to be dismissed for want of any cogent reason.

The  O.P No-1  also  stated  that  immediate  after  providing  service connection electric bill could not prepared and  sent  to  the  consumer  due  to  want of  Master  Card /Completion  Report. Thereafter the office staffs  of  this  O.P No-1  made  several attempts to  take meter reading, but they failed  to collect the meter reading  due to unavailability  of any member of the family in the house .After a long period the complaint on 23.10.14 submitted a reading of 2173 units to this O.P which was taken by   complaint himself. Accordingly the first bill dt 23.10.14 was generated for 2173 units and sent to the consumer for the consumption  period of 26.12.13  to 23.10.2014 and for the bill  payment period Nov,14, dec,14, & jan,15. O.P further submitted that during physical inspection of meter for the next bill this O.P found unit consumption    showed in the meter is less than 2173 units as such the spot bill for the Bill period Feb. 15-Mar 15-Apr- 15 was generated as 2174 adding 1 unit only with the previous reading of 2173. Thereafter bill for the month of May 15- June 15- July 15 was generated after physical verification of the meter which showed present reading 2208 units. Thus the different between present reading and previous reading i.e 34 units was prepared in the bill and sent to the consumer.  The complainant deposited all the above mentioned bills to the OP without raising any objection. At the time of collecting the meter reading for preparation of the bill for the month of Aug 15- Sept 15 the O.P found that the meter of the consumer was stop. Thereafter as per the WBERC guideline the bill was generated on the basis of estimated/adjusted units and 596 units (Rs.3607/-) was claimed from the consumer for this bill. Thereafter bill for the month of Nov 15 –Jan16 was also prepared on the basis of estimated/adjusted units and 669 units (Rs.4099/-) from the consumer. The defective meter of the complainant was replaced by new one on 05.11.2015. It is the case of the O.P that it was not possible for the W.B.S.E.D.C.L. authority to provide new meter to a consumer soon after any complaint is received from a consumer due to crisis of meter. In this situation electric bills are raised as per the calculation mentioned above as per WBERC Rules. The office of the O.P received  one notice from the lawyer on behalf  of the complaint as well as  a letter  dt  15.2.16 from the   Assistant Director Of Consumer Affairs  and FBP Cooch Bihar Regional  Office ,Cooch Behar containing  some vague allegations regarding the previous  bills of complaint. In reply  this O.P  on 17.3.16  sent a letter  to the Assistant    Director  of consumer  affairs and FBP ,Cooch  Bihar  Regional  Office,                  

Ultimately, the O.P prayed for dismissal of the case with costs.

In the light of the contention of both the parties, the following points necessarily come up for consideration to reach a just decision.

POINTS  FOR  CONSIDERATION

1. Is the Complainant a Consumer as per Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the C.P. Act, 1986?

2. Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the instant complaint?

3. Have the O.Ps any deficiency in service as alleged by the Complainant and are they liable in any way?

4. Whether the Complainant is entitled to get relief/reliefs as prayed for?

DECISION  WITH  REASONS

We have gone through the record very carefully, peruse the entire documents in the record also heard the argument advanced by the parties at a length.

Point No.1.

Evidently, the Complainant has been getting electricity from the O.P. No.1 Electric Company on payment of bills. So, the Complainant is consumer under the O.P. No.1 Electric Company u/s 2(1)(d)(ii) of the C.P. Act, 1986.

Point No.2.

Office of the O.P. No.1, Electric Company is situated at Khagrabari, Cooch Behar within jurisdiction of this Forum and total valuation of this case is far less than pecuniary limit of this Forum.

So, this Forum has territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction to try this case.   

Point No.3 & 4.

Both the points are taken up together for consideration of discussion as well as the points are related with each other.

We find that the Complainant, Arun Chandra Debnath, S/O. Lt. Manindra Chandra Debnath, being consumer of domestic electric connection having Meter No. L3137310, enjoying the electricity in his house with his family from the O.Ps dated 26.12.2013. The complainant received his first electric bill on 23.10.2014 consisting of 2173 units of meter reading. This statement also admitted by the O.P. From the copy of series of bills submitted by the O.P (Annexure-1-8)it appears that the O.P send the first electric bill to the complainant after 10 months of providing the service connection to the complainant consisting of 2173 units/ Rs. 13489/- billing date 11/11/2014 without giving any slab benefit to the complainant . On dated 10/11/2014 and 13/01/2015 (Annexure-V &VI) the complainant wrote a letter to the O.P-No-I for rectify the peculiar bill. The O.P-No-I received the same with seal and date. From 15/07/2015 the electric meter stopped functioning. The complainant wrote another letter dated 10/08/2015 (Annexure-XI) to the O.P-No-I to rectify the previous bill and change the stopped electric meter. The complainant also send Legal Notice to the O.P-No-I But till date the O.Ps did not make any response. (Annexure-I) The complainant also furnished a complainant regarding this matter to the Assistant Director of Consumer Affairs and FBP, Cooch Behar Regional Office. (Annexure-IV) O.P-No-I received the notice on 15/02/16. But the dispute was not solved. The Complainant has paid entire bills for this period. In view of our above noted discussion, it is clear that this upper mentioned facts and circumstances are enough to prove the deficiency of service and unfair trade practices adopted by the O.Ps.

The defective meter of the complainant was replaced by new one on 05/11/2015. (Meter No.3557633). From the first electric bill received by the complainant there was a doubt in the mind of the complainant about the meter reading, electric bill and proper functioning of the meter. The complainant wrote several letters to the OP about his doubt and requests them to take initiatives for this purpose. But, all efforts of the complainant went in vain. The legal notice of the complainant to the O.P or brought the matter to the Assistant Director of Consumer Affairs and FBP, Cooch Behar Regional Office for redress also failed due to the gross negligence of the O.Ps.

The functioning of an electric meter can be verified by fixing a cheque meter with the existing meter. But, in this case O.P took no step for verifying the claim of the complainant.

After fixation of the new meter in the complainants house the OP send three electric bill to the consumer. The bill for the month of Feb16-Apr16 (Annexure-6) shows that the estimated adjusted unit was 247. After that in the month of May 16- Jul16 and Aug16-Oct 16 (Annexure-7&8) the complainant consumed 139 and 80 unit of electricity respectively within this Six months. In the new electric meter the gross electrical consumption of the consumer is far less than the previous gross consumption. So, it can be assumed that the doubt of the consumer may be right. But at this stage it cannot be proved because the old electric meter has already been changed.

In the light of the above observation we are convinced to hold that the present dispute cropped up from the beginning due to some defects in the meter and the prayer of the Complainant to the O.P. No. 1 in this regard was not attended properly. Due to such activity of the O.Ps the complainant is suffering from mental pain and agonies. Thus, deficiency in service cannot be ruled out against the O.Ps.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case we are convinced to hold that the Complaint be allowed but in part.

ORDER

Hence, it is ordered,

           That, the Complaint succeeds on contest but in part against the O.P No-1and Ex-parte against  O.P No-2 with cost of Rs. 1000/-.

The OPs are directed to pay Rs 5.000/-to the complainant for mental pain and agonies of the complainant and Rs. 2.000/- for their deficiency in service to the complainant. 

The ordered amount shall pay to the Complainant by the Opposite Parties within 30 days failure of which the Opposite Parties jointly and/or severally shall pay Rs.50/- for each day’s delay and the amount to be accumulated shall be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid Account, West Bengal.

Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied to the parties concerned by hand/by Registered Post with A/D forthwith, free of cost, for information & necessary action, as per rules.

Dictated and corrected by me.