Order No. -16                                                                                  Dt.-31/08/2015

Shri Asoke Kumar Das,President

Complainant’s case in brief is that she is a bonafied consumer of the OPs(WBSEDCL) and her Consumer Id. no. is 400133468. She has paid electric bills regularly up to Feb.-’13. In Mar.-’13 she found some discrepancy in her electric meter. She reported that matter to Customer Care of OPs. In Oct’13she received absurd bill. She raised protest in the office OP1 against that bill but inven. In Dec-’13 and in Jan-’14 she also received absurd bills of Rs.24,214/- & Rs.25,145/- and due to financial stringency she couldn’t pay the said bills and on 08/02/’14 her electric connection was disconnected by OP1. Since then she has been passing her days without electricity. Hence, this case.

The OPs(WBSEDCL) have registered this case by filing a W/V denying and disputing the claims and contention of the complainant with prayer for dismissal of this case. Their specific stand is that the complainant got her first electric bill of 80 units for the months of Mar-’12 to May-’12 and there after she didn’t get any bill as per Yellow Card reading. So, due to high accumulation of arrear, the bill for the period from Mar-’13 to May-’13 comes to 2,640 units and so the consumer(complainant) didn’t pay the bill and her line was disconnected. Now the bill may be regenerated as per Yellow Card reading.

-::Points for considerate::-

1) Is the case maintainable?

2) Is the complainants a consumer?

3) Are the OPs guilty for deficiency in service as alleged?

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

::Decision with reasons::-

All points are taken up together for consideration and decision.

Seen and perused the petition of complainant, the W/V(both are supported by affidavit),the W/A & the documents filed by the parties. We have heard argument advanced by Ld. Lawyer of both sides in full.

At the time of argument, Ld Lawyer for the OPs submitted that the electric connection of the complainant was restored long before and that the arrear electric bills of the complainant may be regenerated as per reading of her Yellow Card i.e. on the basis of energy consumed by her initially i.e. 80 units so that the complainant can pay her arrear electric bills Ld. Lawyer for the complainant submitted that he came to learn from the representative of the complaint present in the court room that the electric connection of the complainant has already restored and she has been enjoying electricity in her house and that the complainant wants to pay her arrear electric bills as proposed by the Ld. Lawyer for the OPs.

In view of above submission of Ld. Lawyers of both sides and after due consideration of the materials of the record, we find and hold that this case is well maintainable and the complainant is a consumer of OPs(WBSEDCL), we now find that the main grievance of the complainant has already redressed by the OPs by way of restoration of her electric connection and that the complainant has been enjoying electricity in her house and she wants to pay the arrear electric bills. In such circumstances question in deficiency in service against the OPs are alleged doesn’t arise. In this view of the matter the complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case.  All points are disposed off.

In the result the case fails.

Hence, it is

Ordered

That the case / application stands dismissed on contest, but with out cost.

How ever the Ops(WBSEDCL) is requested to regenerated the arrear electric bills of complainant as per initial reading of her Yellow Card(80 units for 3 months) giving her sufficient time to pay the same and after receiving the said regenerated arrear electric bills the complainant shall pay the same within time along with her current bills.

Let a plain copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost forthwith in terms of the provision of  Rule 5(10) of  West Bengal Consumer Protection Rule 1987.