Order No. -38                                                                                                       Dt.-14/01/2016

F I N A L   O R D E R

       Shri Asoke Kumar Das, President

 Complainant’s case in short is that she is consumer of O.P., WBSEDCL and her Consumer ID no.is 422049601 and the electric connection was in the name of her deceased father-in-law Nathmal Daga. The O.P. had not taken meter reading and sends regularly for last five years despite her request by letters. On 11/06/2013 and on 04/09/2013 the O.P. has sent bills of Rs.87,795.15 for the period from June 2013 to August 2013 and Rs.16,372.64 for the period from September 2013 to November 2013 and demanding those bills most arbitrarily and and illegally with threat to disconnect electricity service. On 21/09/2013 complainant served lawyer’s notice upon O.P. for settlement of the issue but no fruitful result came out.  Hence this case.

  The O.P. WBSEDCL did not contest the case despite service of notice. Hence the case was heard ex-parte.

  Seen and perused the petition of complaint and the documents annexed.

          After due consideration of the said materials on record and the arguments advanced by the Ld. Lawyer for the complainant we find that the complainant was never the consumer of the O.P., WBSEDCL and her late father-in-law Nathwal Daga was the consumer of WBSEDCL and his consumer i/d no. is 422019601, S/C no.is 594/8/26A but the complainant has claimed herself as consumer of O.P. And aforesaid consumer i/d, as her own consumer i/d. There is no avertment in the petition of complaint as who are the legal heirs/beneficiaries of Late Nathwal Daga and why they have not joined with the complainant to file this case. That apart this Forum has no power to quash the electric bill as prayed for. We also cannot give direction to O.P., WBSEDCL not to disconnect electric line of the complainant as per her prayer which is in the neture of mandatory injunction and and that power can only be exercised by a competent Civil Court.

        Now on careful perusal of the petition of complaint, its annexures and after due consideration of the argument of the complainant’s Ld. Lawyer we find no evidence wherefrom we can come to the conclusion that the O.P. is guilty for deficiency in service.

         In this view of the matter we find and hold that the complainant is not entitled to any relief in this case and the case deserves dismissal.

   Hence, it is

O R D E R E D

     that the case/ application is dismissed ex-parte without cost.

              Let copy of this final order be supplied free of cost forthwith to the complainant/ her Ld. Advocates/agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/sent by general post, in terms of Rule 5(10) of West Bengal Consumer Protection Rules 1987.