This is the case under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.  The facts of the case to put in a nutshell, are as below:-

The complainant, Hayat Ali Sk. is a consumer of OP, Station Manager, Bethuadahari Group Electric Supply, W.B.S.E.D.C.L. vide connection No. D 4248.  The complainant made a complaint earlier before this Forum to that effect the OP was directed to send a fresh bill to the complainant for the period from June, 2010 to August, 2010 for consumption of 1600 units along with compensation as stated in the complaint.  Subsequently, the OP on 21.08.14 sent a notice demanding Rs. 9252/- without mentioning any month.  Then the OP sent a bill and demanded Rs. 10247/- on 17.01.14 and Rs. 994/- on 17.11.14.  Though the complainant wanted to pay the last bill of Rs. 994/- but OP did not allow to pay the same.  On 16.09.14 complainant prayed remedy to the OP but to no effect.  Hence, the case.   The complainant prayed for fresh bill from June, 10 to August, 10 deducting Rs. 4000/- and compensation of Rs. 20,000/- and other relief. 

OP has contested this case by filing written version on 23.12.14 denying all the contentions of the complaint.  The sum and substance of the written version is as below:-

The complaint is not maintainable in its present form.  The complainant has no cause of action.   The complaint is barred by the provision of estoppels, waiver and acquiescence.  The petition is barred by the provision of res-judicata.  The complaint is bad for defect of parties.  The OP has admitted that one consumer case was filed before this Forum and the Ld. Forum passed an order on 30.03.12.  As per direction of that order, a fresh bill was sent to the complainant for 1600 units for the period from June, 2010 to August, 2010 amounting to Rs. 9853/- which was further divided into 12 instalments of Rs. 771/-.  The deduction amount of Rs. 4,000/- has been locked and deducted against the account as per order of the Court.  But the complainant did not pay the amount till date.   So the OP has no negligence or deficiency in service and the case may be dismissed in limini. 

POINTS FOR DECISION

1. Point No. 1:   Is the complainant a consumer?
2. Point No. 2:   Has OP negligently operated upon the complainant?
3. Point No. 3:   What relief the complainant is entitled to get?

REASOND DECISIONS

            For the purpose of brevity and convenience all the points are taken up together for discussion.

            On perusal of electricity bill period dated 7^th June, 2014 to 7^th September, 2014 and bill dtd. 21.08.2014, it is clear that complainant, Hayat Ali Sk. is a consumer under OP electricity.  It is also clear that as a regular consumer the amount of electric bill has been paid by him regularly since long period of time.   So as per Consumer Protection Act, 1986 the Electricity Board is a service provider and the complainant is entitled to get service from OP Electricity Board.   So as per section 2(d) (ii) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 the complainant is a consumer.

            The complainant is not permitted to file fresh complaint on self same cause of action in the Consumer Forum as the ld. Forum has already passed final order regarding dispute of 1600 units for the period from June, 2010 to August, 2010 in case No. CC/11/89.   Regarding this matter the complainant is at liberty to file execution case against OP Electricity Board in this Forum as there is no time limitation for filing the same.   The Forum at this stage has no power to pass any new order regarding dispute of 1600 units for the period from June, 2010 to August, 2010 as it is barred by the principles of res judicata. 

            An electric bill dtd. 21.08.2014 (Annexure – 3) sent to the complainant from the end of the OP for payment of Rs. 9,253/- within 11.09.2014 does not show any bill period which amounts to a gross negligence and fault on the part of OP Electricity Board.  Only this part of allegation has been taken into consideration by this Forum as it creates a new cause of action against the OP Electricity Board.  The OP cannot demand any bill amount without informing the bill period.   In this respect it should be the duty of the OP Electricity Board to issue  fresh bill with mentioning the bill period so that the complainant can understand clearly their demand.   Complaint is allowed partly.  All the points are decided on the basis of above observation. 

Hence,

Ordered,

That, the case CC/2014/147  be and the same is allowed in part against the OP electricity Board with cost of Rs. 500/-.

The OP Electricity Board is directed to issue fresh bill with mentioning the bill period as against the bill amount of Rs. 9,253/- dtd. 21.08.2014 after adjustment of Rs.500/- towards cost.

The complainant is at liberty to file execution case against the OP Electricity Board in respect of case No. CC/11/89 decided by this Forum. 

Let a copy of this judgment be delivered to the parties free of cost.