Judgment : Dt.4.1.2018

Shri S. K. Verma, President

            This is a complaint made by one Smt. Sarbani Chatterjee, w/o Late Subir Kumar Chatterjee, residing at B-30, Green Park, Purbachal Road (N), Haltu P.S.-Garfa, Kolkata-700 078, representing her as a Trustee and Secretary of Swami Purnananda Asram Swami Amalananda Memorial Trust of 315, Vivekananda Sarani, Garfa, P.S.-Survey Park, Kolkata-700 078 against The District Engineer, Southern District (CESC Ltd.), 6, Mandevilla Gardens, P.S.-Gariahat, Kolkata-700 019, OP No.1, The Grievance Redressal Officer, Southern District (CESC Ltd.),  6, Mandevilla Gardens, P.S.-Gariahat, Kolkata-700 019, OP No.2, The Central Grievance Redressal Officer, Southern District (CESC Ltd.),  6, Mandevilla Gardens, P.S.-Gariahat, Kolkata-700 019, OP No.3 praying for sending electric bill due from the month of November, 2014 and to send an exact unit and correct statement as to the bills since paid and directing the OP to discontinue the unfair trade practice in relation to the supply of electricity and sending bill arbitrarily and whimsically and to pay Rs.5,00,000/- to the Complainant.

            Facts in brief are that Complainant is legally trustee and Secretary to a trust under the name and style Swami Purnananda Ashram Swami Amalananda Memorial Trust. The name of the said trust has been recorded in the record of office by regular payment of the Corporation tax. The said trust has been in existence from the year 1941 and thereafter from the year 1983. The said trust enjoyed electricity from CESC Ltd. for a long against the payment of money having Consumer No.75189012001 and electric meter has been installed over a portion of the trust property. In the month of October, 2014, the OP sent an arbitrary bill amounting to Rs.3,190/- having due date 20.11.2014, which was disputed by the Complainant being excess. Thereafter, in the month of October, 2014 again the quantum of bill amount was raised. Being apprehensive of the said pretention Complainant asked the OP to cut off the supply of electricity by letters dt.10.11.204 and 14.1.2015 and send these letters to the Officer-in-charge to the local Police Station. But, no relief was provided to the Complainant. So, Complainant filed this case.

            OP, CESC, filed written version and denied the material allegations of the complaint. Further, OPs have stated that on 1.2.1982 electric supply by them to the Secretary, Swami Purnananda Asram Swami Aamalananda Memorial Trust at premises No.315, Vivekananda Sarani, Kolkata-700 078 and the said supply was disconnected on 5.11.2014. Thereafter one representative of Swami Purnananda Ashram (Shivkali Mandir) applied for a new meter on the said premises on 4.8.2014, the men of these OPs carried out an inspection 6.8.2014 and sent offer letter on 8.8.2014 in favour of the said Swami Purnananda Ashram and also requested to submit consent for removal of existing meter. These OPs further have stated that Swami Purnananda Ashram (Shivkali Mandir) submitted consent for removal of meter No.4163136, standing in the name of Secretary, Swami Purnananda Ashram Swami Amalnnda Memorial Trust and after necessary compliance and payment of MASD bills these OPs installed a new meter bearing No.5038140 in  favour of Swami Purnananda Ashram. Further the OPs have stated that Swami Purnananda Ashram Swami Amalananda Memorial trust are the same establishment and situated at the same premises and there is no scope to raise monthly consumption charges. OPs have also stated that on receipt of the complaint from the Complainant they carried out an inspection on 11.4.2017, where it was found that the Ashram is getting supply from the meter No.5038140 in the name of Swami Purnananda Ashram. There is no necessity to give another meter. This case is filed after a lapse of almost three years and there is no ground of filing this case. So, this OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

Decision with reasons

            Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief against which OPs submitted that they will not file questionnaire. Thereafter, OP filed evidence and  Complainant filed questionnaire. OPs did not file affidavit-in-reply and filed a petition for argument of this case.

            Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.

            On perusal of the prayer portion, it appears that the Complainant has prayed for a direction upon the OPs to send electric bill due from the month of November, 2014 onwards. It appears from the record that this complaint was filed on 5.5.2017 that means after a lapse of more than two years. As per Consumer Protection Act a complaint cannot be filed after lapse of two years and relief cannot be sought after the laps of two years. As such, there is no question of granting these reliefs.

            Complainant has prayed for compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. The grounds mentioned for claiming this compensation is disconnection of electricity to the Complainant. Further, OP, CESC has clearly mentioned that by a different meter they are supplying the electricity to the Complainant and there is no question of installing another meter to the premises for the same purpose.

            Furthermore, claim of compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- has to be substantiated by clear and specific allegation which is not appearing in either the complaint or the affidavit-in-chief filed by the Complainant.

            As such we are of the view that Complainant failed to prove the allegations for compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. In the circumstances, there does not appear any ground to allow any of the reliefs of the Complainant as prayed.

Hence,

ordered

               CC/253/2017 and the same is dismissed on contest.