Consumer Complaint No. 228 of 2014
Date of filing: 24.11.2014 Date of disposal: 15.12.2016.
Present :
Sri Asoke Kr. Mandal Hon’ble President,
Smt. Silpi Majumder Hon’ble Member,
Sri Pankaj Kr. Sinha Hon’ble Member,
Munshi Rejammal Hossain,
S/o. Munshi Monowar Hossain,
Resident ofVill. & P.O.-Berugram,
P.S.-Khandaghosh, Dist.-Burdwan Complainant.
VERSUS
- WBSEDCL, having its Branch Office at
Khandaghosh,C.C.C., Seharabazar,
Berugram, Service through its Station
Manager/ Assistant Engineer.
- WBSEDCL, having its Divisional Office,
At Power House Complex, Power House Para,
Burdwan, service through its Divisional Manager. Opposite Parties.
Appeared for the complainant : Ld. Advocate Subrata Ghosh.
Appeared for the O. P. Nos. 1 & 2 : Ld. Advocate, Biswanath Nag.
JUDGEMENT
This is a case U/s. 12 of C.P. Act for an award directing the O.Ps. to refund the quotation money of Rs.2,77,467/- along with interest, to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment and to pay Rs.20,000/- as litigation cost, to the complainant.
The complainant’s case in short is that on the basis of the complainant’s application for new electric connection for industrial purposes, the O.Ps. issued a quotation for Rs.2,77,467/- on 9.12.2009. The complainant paid such quotation money of Rs.2,77,467/- on 9.2.2010 to effect the electric connection for industrial purposes in his premises. The O.Ps. accumulated the materials to install the electric connection but at the time of erecting the poles the neighbours made objection and as such the installation of new electric connection was stopped and remained incomplete. Thereafter, the complainant made a written request to the O.Ps. on 4.10.2010 to install 100 KVA Transformer in place of 63 KVA Transformer existing in the market and to arrange for installation of said new connection in the premises of the complainant, from the said 100 KVA Transformer. The O.Ps accepted such request and issued another quotation dated 16.9.2011 for Rs.19,125/- only to install the 100KVA Transformer in the market in place of 63 KVA Transformer to effect the new electric connection to the premises of the complainant. The complainant paid such quotation amount of Rs.19,125/- on 23.9.2011. The complainant also paid Rs.17,528/- towards security deposit and Rs.20,975/- towards House SC Charge on 28.9.2011. In that connection the O.Ps. issued money receipts. Thereafter the O.Ps. instolled 100 KVA Transformer in place of said 63KVA Transforma and from said 100KVA Transform, they effected new electric connection in the premises of the complainant for industrial purposes after observing all the formalities of WBSEDCL. Then the complainant requested the O.Ps. on several occasions to refund the quotation money of Rs.2,77,467/- deposited on 9.2.2010 but the O.Ps. did not refund the same. Such act of the O.Ps. shows deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. Lastly on 30.8.2013 the complainant in writing requested the O.Ps. to refund such quotation amount but they did not pay any heed to that. For the act of the O.Ps. the complainant has been suffering from mental pain, agony and harassment and has been forced to come before this Forum to get relief. Hence, this case with the prayer as mentioned above.
The O.Ps. contested this case by filing written version while stating inter-alia that the case is not maintainable, the complainant has no cause of action, there is/ was no relationship of consumer and vendor in between the complainant and the O.Ps. and this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide this case. It has been further stated by these O.Ps. that the complainant Munshi Rejammal Hossain applied for new industrial connection in prescribed form and accordingly a quotation dated 9.12.2009 for Rs.2,77,467/- was issued, the complainant paid such quotation amount on 9.2.2010, thereafter work order being No.1259 dated 17.2.2010 was issued to the enlisted contractor to execute the work , but the contractor intimated that during the pole erection an objection in writing was received and they failed to effect the new electric connection in the premises of the complainant, the complainant thereafter by filing a petition dated 4.10.2010 made a request to change the transformer of 63 KVA situated nearer to the bazaar replacing the same by 100 KVA Transformer and to draw the electric line from the changed transformer of 100 KVA in his premises, accordingly the O.Ps. issued an additional quotation of Rs.19,125/- which was paid by the complainant on 23.9.2011. It has been further stated by these O.Ps. that subsequently on 30.8.2013 the complainant in writing made a request to refund the quotational amount of Rs.2,77,467/- against which work order No.129 dated 17.2.2010 was issued, in response to his application by sending a letter vide Memo No.KNG/Intimation/147(a) dated4.9.2013, these O.Ps. requested the complainant to appear at the office of S.M. Khandaghosh CCC, with all original related documents for further process but the complainant did not turn up, as such the matter was not disposed of, as per provision of Electricity Act 2003 and Rules framed there under, if there is any grievance against any bill or any amount or its payment made thereof that should be ventilated before the Regulatory Commission or before the person or authority empowered by the said Act and as such this Forum has no jurisdiction to try this case. It is therefore, claimed by these O.Ps. that the case is liable to be dismissed with cost against the O.Ps.
DECISION WITH REASONS
In support of his case the complainant has relied upon the contents of the complaint, evidence on affidavit and the photocopies of the quotation dated 9.12.2009, three money receipts showing payment of quotation money of Rs.2,77,467/-, letter issued to the Station Manager dated 4.10.2010, quotation dated 16.9.2011 for Rs.19,125/-, money receipt showing payment of such Rs.19,125/-, another two money receipts showing payment of Rs.17,528/- and 20,975/- and letter dated 30.8.2013 written to the Assistant Engineer and Station Manager.
On the other hand from the side of the contesting O.Ps. no evidence has been adduced but they have relied upon the contents of their written version and written argument submitted on 27.1.2016.
We carefully perused the contents of the pleadings and other materials on record. It is admitted that the complainant Munshi Rejammal Hossain applied for new electric connection for industrial purpose, in prescribed form and accordingly a quotation dated 19.12.2009 for Rs.2,77,467/- was issued, the complainant paid such quotation money, thereafter work order being No.1259 dated 17.2.2010 was issued to the enlisted contractor to execute the same but the contractor failed to erect pole for that purpose due to the objection raised by the neighbours. It is also admitted that the complainant himself by filing a petition dated 4.10.2010 made a request to change the transformer of 63 KVA situated nearer to the Bazar replacing the same by 100 KVA transformer and to draw the electric line from the changed transformer of 100 KVA to give electric connection in his premises. In complaint the complainant has stated that on accepting said proposal the O.Ps. issued a fresh quotation dated 16.9.2011 for Rs.19,125/- and the complainant has paid such amount and thereafter the service connection was effected. But the quotation money of Rs.2,77,467/- deposited on 9.2.2010 has not been refunded to the complainant. On the other hand the O.Ps. have stated that the second quotation was not a fresh quotation, that was the additional quotation and the O.Ps. on receipt of additional quotation amount of Rs.19,125/- effected the service connection. The question whether the quotation of Rs.19,125/- was an additional quotation or the same was a fresh quotation to effect the service connection, is required to be decided. But before deciding this issue it is essential to see whether the complainant is a consumer and whether this Forum has been empowered to decide the claim of the complainant. In Para-1 of the complaint the complainant has specifically stated that the complainant applied for new electric connection for industrial purpose before the O.Ps. In the body of the complaint the complainant has further admitted that in that connection he deposited quotation money of Rs.2,77,467/- and subsequently he deposited Rs.19,125/- as fresh quotation money and on receipt of said quotation money the electric connection was effected. In Para-7 of the written version the O.Ps. have stated that there is /was no relationship of consumer and vender in between the complainant and the O.Ps. as the service connection in question was effected for industrial purpose and as the complainant himself has admitted that he applied for new electric connection for the industrial purpose before the O.Ps.
The word ‘consumer’ has been defined in Section-2(d) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Section-2 (d) of C.P. Act, 1986 provides “consumer” means any person who-
- Buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment when such use is made with the approval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose; or
- [hires or avails of] any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who [hires or avails of] the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person [but does not include a person who avails of such services for any commercial purpose].
In the complaint the complainant has not brought a specific case that he is a person of goods bought and used by him and services availed by him exclusively for the purposes of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment. As per provision of Section-2(d), the person who obtains goods for resale or for any commercial purposes and the person who avails of services for any commercial purposes shall not be treated as consumer. As the complainant has admitted that he made a prayer for electric connection for industrial purposes, he is not entitled to claim himself as consumer and in view of the above discussions we are of the opinion that the complainant is not a consumer and accordingly, this Forum is not empowered to decide the claim as mentioned in the complaint by the complainant.
Accordingly, the case fails. Fees paid, is correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that complaint being No.228/2014 is dismissed on contest against the O.Ps. without any cost.
Let the copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.
(Asoke Kr. Mandal)
Dictated and corrected by me. President
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
(Asoke Kr. Mandal)
President
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
(Silpi Majumder) (Sri Pankaj Kr. Sinha)
Member Member
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
