IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  FORUM,

MURSHIDABAD,  AT  BERHAMPORE.

CASE No.  CC No. 29/2017.

Date of Filing :                    Date of Admission :                      Date of Disposal :

  14.03.2017                                12.05.2017                                      17.05.2018

Marjina Bibi,

W/o Md.Sarjil Hossain,

Vill. Maharul Anantapur, P.O. Maharul,

P.S. Nabagram, Dist. Murshidabad, Pin 713146.                  ……………… Complainant.

      -Vs –

1.  The Station Manager,

Nabagram C.C.C., WBSEDCL,

P.S. Nabagram, Dist. Murshidabad, Pin 742184.

2.  The Regional Manager,

WBSEDCL,

Administrative Building,

Cantonment Road, P.O. and P.S. Berhampore,

Dist. Murshidabad, Pin 742101.                          ............ Opposite Parties.  

Sri Kapil Dev Ghosh, , Ld. Advocate                              … for the Complainant

Sri Siddharth Sankar Dhar, Ld. Advocate                    … for the Opposite Parties

                  Present :   Asish Kumar Senapati ……. . . . .  President.

                              Chandrima Chakraborty …­. .…. Member.           

                                                                                                 Cont. ……….…. 2

= 2 =

J U D G M E N T

 Chandrima Chakraborty,  Member.

               Claiming himself as a consumer, under the C. P. Act, 1986, the Complainant has sought for interference of this Forum in respect of fact complained of.

               The case stated in the complaint, in succinct, is that, the complainant used to have and hold a C(A) Tariff Class Electricity connection bearing valid Consumer ID No. 313320646 by using a running meter bearing No. SFB 710550 and the same is continued till date by paying proper Bills.  

                 But due to mistake and oversight on part of the Opposite Party another electricity connection was started in the name of the Complainant being Customer ID No. 313320646 and the Meter No. RSX 84993 was showing against the name of the Complainant. As the result of which a huge unpaid outstanding amount of Rs. 42,030.90/- only for the period of April, 2016 to July, 2016 as well as Rs. 42,456.00/- only for the period of May, 2016 to July, 2016 was showing to be due against the Complainant without consuming any electricity against the said Electric Meter.

                   The Complainant severally visited the Office of the Opposite Party for correction of the said mistake on their part but the Opposite Party neither paid any heed to it nor they took any necessary step to rectify the same and ultimately the opposite party failed to settle the said matter amicably and miserably failed to discharge their obligation towards the Complainant,

Cont. ……….…. 3

= 3 =

what amounts to negligence and deficiency in rendering service by the Opposite Party towards the Complainant for which being victimized and harassed by the Opposite Party the Complainant finding no other alternative than to file the instant case seeking adequate redressal against the Opposite Party. 

                Resisting the complaint, the Opposite Party filed the Written Version denying the contention made by the Complainant in his complaint and stating inter alia that the case is not maintainable, the Complainant has no cause of action, barred by limitation and the Forum has no jurisdiction to deal the instant matter.        

                The specific case of the Opposite Party in gist is that, actually the Complainant is a Consumer under this Opposite Party having a STW connection being No. 313320646 and the Meter No. SFB 71550. No replacement of Meter was done in respect of her STW connection.

                 But one meter bearing No. SFB 71550 was inserted against the STW connection of the Complainant during Meter replacement entry of another customer which is a bonafide mistake on part of this Opposite Party and this Opposite Party has no malafide intention and this Opposite Party immediately took step to solve the said problem. Thus, the Opposite Party denied any deficiency and negligence in rendering service towards the Complainant and prayed for dismissal of this case.

Point for Determination

1. Whether the instant case is maintainable ?

2. Whether there is negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the O.P?      

3. Whether the Complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?

Cont. ……….…. 4

= 4 =

Decision with Reasons

               All the points are taken up together for consideration for convenience and brevity.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

               On overall evaluation of the argument made before us by the Ld. Advocate of the Complainant and the Ld. Advocate for the Opposite Party and perusing all the material evidences on record, admittedly the Complainant is a consumer under this Opposite Party having a STW Electric connection being No. 313320646 and the Meter No. SFB 71550.

                The record reveals that it is admitted by the Opposite Party by filing their Written version that due to a bonafide mistake on part of the Opposite Party one meter bearing No. SFB 71550 was inserted against the STW connection of the Complainant during Meter replacement entry of another customer.

                So it is the unanimous view of the Forum that the Opposite Party has done a bonafide mistake without any malafide intention which is also admitted by the Complainant herself in her petition of Complaint. Thus the Opposite party is liable to rectify the said mistake immediately and is not liable to pay any compensation.

                In light of the above analysis, we are of the opinion that the Complainant has proved her case and is entitled to get the relief as prayed for and consequentially the points for consideration are decided in positive.

Cont. ……….…. 5

= 5 =

      In the result, we proceed to pass

O R D E R

                That the case be and the same is allowed on contest against the Opposite Party without any cost.

                 That the Opposite Party is directed to rectify the mistake by correction the name of the Complainant and to remit the alleged Bill outstanding amount of Rs. 42,030.90/- only for the period of April, 2016 to July, 2016 as well as Rs. 42,456.00/- only for the period of May, 2016 to July, 2016, against the name of the Complainant within one month from the date of this ‘Order’.

                In the event of non compliance of any portion of the order by the Opposite Parties within a period of one month from the date of this ‘Order’, the default Opposite Party/s shall have to pay a sum of Rs. 100/- per day, from the date of this order till full satisfaction of the decree, which amount shall be deposited by the said default Opposite Parties in the State Consumer Legal Aid Fund.

      Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgment / be sent forthwith under ordinary post  to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.

MEMBER                                                         PRESIDENT