The complainant is consumer of WBSEDCL in respect of electric service connection bearing no. 22560, consumer ID No. 242177997. The aforesaid service connection was given to the premises of the complainant on 16/2/2008 along with a meter bearing no. 7SRSO1737 with initial reading of 01 unit. The complainant in his complaint stated that since the date of connection of electricity he is/was not consuming electricity from aforesaid service connection and accordingly the meter is /was not recording unit but bills were being prepared demanding charges which were paid by the complainant in time.
Since the month of August 2012 bills were prepared by the O.P. without going through consumption of the unit recorded in the meter as the meter reading was 10 units on 2.2.2015. Despite complaint on disputed bills for the month of August 2012 to April 2014 the O.P. paid no heed to it. Finding no other alternative complainant files the present complaint before this Forum for appropriate relief.
O.P. is contesting the case by filing written version contending inter alia that the case is not maintainable as the door of the complainant was found locked twice and from the side of the O.P. intimation was given to the complainant to take care and to remain present at the time of next meter reading but the complainant failed. The O.P. specially stated that the bills for the month of August 2012 to April 2014 was not excessive and the said bills have been prepared legally as per consumed electric energy considering the load capacity of the service connection as the door of the complainant was closed. The O.P. prays for dismissal of the case.
Now the questions are:
- is there any deficiency on service on the part of the O.P.?
- is the complainant to get relief as prayed for?
Decision with reason:
Admittedly the complainant has electricity service connection being consumer ID No. 242177997 and on 16/2/2008 the meter bearing no. 7SRSO1737 showed the initial reading of 01 unit. Ld advocate of the complainant draws our attention to annexure (1) where we find that the meter reading was 10 units and complainant disputed the bills for the month of August 2012 to April 2014 (Annexure 2/1 2//5 series). As per annexure 2/6 (billing dated 12/11/2014) a bill issued by the O.P. remarked with ‘7SRSO1737 is seems defective’ admits of defective meter so there should be no point left before the O.P. to raise any plea or objection.
O.P. verbally submits that to ascertain defective meter a challenge meter is to be installed and as per challenge meter consumption for a period of 15 days is to be considered. Then as per consumption a bill for 90 days would be prepared and if the meter is not defective then the amount would be ascertained on the basis of the reading shown by the challenged meter and /or the original meter which would be similar.
The Ld advocate for the complainant agrees on the submission of the O.P. with a request for prior intimation to the complainant while installing the challenge meter.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and materials before us and submissions of both sides we are of the opinion that there is deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. though the complainant earnestly requested the O.P. for rectification of the bill for the month of August 2012 to April 2014 and to raise a revised bill considering the meter card which reflects 10 units on 2/2/2015 but O.P. did not care and no revised bill has yet been issued by the O.P. though there was endorsement of ‘ 7SRSO1737 is seems defective’.
Considering this as facts we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to get relief in part as prayed for. The O.P. should get opportunity to install a challenge meter and free access to the premises of the complainant for 15 days after installation of challenge meter to verify the units’ consumption during the day time otherwise O.P. would have no liability to compare the challenge meter with original one. The case is disposed of accordingly. Hence,
ORDERED
The Consumer Complaint No. 5 of 2015 is allowed in part on contest but without cost.
The O.P. is directed to install a challenge meter in the premises of the complainant mentioned in the petition of complaint within one month from this date.
The complainant is directed to allow the O.P. to install a challenge meter with a prior intimation of 7 days and to allow O.P. to inspect the consumption units any time during 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. in a day after installation of challenge meter for 15 days. O.P. is also directed to prepare the revised bill as per law considering the reading of the challenge meter for the period from August 2012 to April 2014.
Let a copy of this judgement be supplied to the parties free of charge.
