:    J U D G M E N T    :

This is a case under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 filed by Biswanath Madhu.

 The facts of the case, to put in a nutshell, are as below:- 

The complainant is a consumer of OP having I.D. No. 334070454.  He is a regular payer of electric bills and there is a motor having been run by electricity for the purpose of cultivation.  The motor is not functioning properly because of the overloading.  There is an order of the Hon'ble High Court for installation of a new transmitter but the OP did not obey order of the High Court.  There is a problem of overloading which has not been solved.  The OP was informed in writing number of times (Annexure – 1 to 10), but to no effect.  Hence, the complainant prays for an order so that there is no shortage of electricity in his area so that his cultivation does not suffer.  He prays for compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/- and cost. 

The OP has contested the case by filing written version challenging the contentions of the complainant.  It has been pleaded that there is no disobedience of the order of the Hon'ble High Court.  The complainant is a defaulter and has not been paying his electric bill regularly.  There is an outstanding bill due in the name of the complainant to the tune of Rs. 55,455/- from 2013 to 2015 which the complainant did not pay.  The question of overloading does not arise as the order of the Hon'ble Court was duly complied with.   The complainant is not entitled to get any relief. 

POINTS FOR DECISION

1. Point No. 1:   Is the complainant a consumer?
2. Point No. 2:   Has the OP committed any act leading to deficiency in service?
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.

            We have meticulously gone through the evidence on record and also the documents annexed along with the written argument filed by both parties.  Ram Krishna Pandey, PW 3, Radha Gobinda Paul, PW-2 and Biswanath Madhu, PW-1, corroborated with each other.  Perused the money receipt being No. 8966304 Rs. 25,000/- and 9128265 Rs. 20,000/- and the electric bills in the name of the complainant dtd.  25.02.15. 

            We have given serious thought over the matter and patient hearing to the parties.  Perused the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court along with the Annexures – 1 to 10. 

            Hon'ble Justice Aniruddha Bose, directed in written petition 13777(w) 2013 on 17.09.13 but that order relates to BPL Card holders which the present complaint is not.  The order is not applicable to the present applicant. 

            It is clear from the pleadings and also from the documents that the complainant has outstanding dues amounting to Rs. 39,656.53.  It is the duty of the complainant to make up-to-date payment to get electrical facilities. 

            We have meticulously gone through the annexed documents from the Annexure – 1 to 10.  The complainant prayed for a separate transmitter so that there is no overloading in the existing transmitter.  But the complainant has failed to prove that the existing meter is inefficient to take the load.  Moreover, no villager has come to support his contention. 

            The complainant has also failed to establish that he is entitled to get Rs. 3,00,000/-.  No cultivator has come to establish that due to shortage of electricity supply there was damage of crops.  Hence, the prayer for cost of Rs. 50,000/- does not hold much water. 

Having gone through the evidence, interrogatories, pleadings and its answers we are inclined to hold that the complainant has failed to establish its case.  The prayer of the Ld. Advocate for the OP-W.B.S.E.D.C.L. has also been considered by us.  The complainant shall pay Rs. 39656.53 by 13 instalments which shall start from 11.02.2016.  He shall go on paying the instalments by the 11^th of each month till full payment.  Thus, superintendent / Station Manger, Bethuadahari shall look into the matter of allegation of the complainant and ascertain whether the separate transmitter is required at Jugpur Colony, P.O. Jugpur, Dist. Nadia to facilitate regular supply of electricity.

Hence,

Ordered,

That, the case CC/2015/27 be and the same is allowed in part with a direction to the complainant to pay Rs. 39656.53 by 13 equal instalments which have start from 11.02.2016 and by the 11^th of each succeeding month till full payment.   The OP is directed to inspect to ascertain the need of installation of a new transmitter.   No cost.

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