Date of filing: 09.09.2019 Date of disposal: 11.10.2023
Complainant: Manamath Nath Das, resident of Dharma Shimla, P.O.-Debipur, P.S.-Memari, Dist. Purba Bardhaman, Pin-713146, phn-9332266615
-V E R S U S -
Opposite Party: West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. Memari Customer Care Centre, repsented by its Station Manager having its office at Memari, P.O. –Memari, P.S. Memari, Dist.-Purba Bardhaman, Pin-713146.
Present:
Smt. Subrata Saha (Hazra) Hon’ble President
Mr. Atanu Kumar Dutta Hon’ble Member
Appeared for the Complainant: Suvro Chakraborty -Ld. Advocate.
Appeared for the Opposite Party: Biswanath Nag - Ld. Advocate.
F i n a l O r d e r
Complaint divulge to the fact that the Complainant being a consumer of Electricity Department (who is made O.P. to this case) laid grievances that he being the owner of Meter No.DDBB392274N, under Consumer ID No.517033553 and being in domestic connection used to pay Electric bills to the O.P.-Department regularly. But all on a sudden in the month of April, 2017, Complainant received a bill on 28.03.2017 at the tune of Rs.5359/- which he paid on 28.06.2017. Subsequently, this Electric Department raised another bill on 05.01.2018 for the month of January to March 2018 of Rs.8217/-. Before that this Electric Department raised two bills of huge amount and against those huge bills this Complainant went to the Consumer Affairs Department on 25.01.2018 and at tripartite agreement among him as consumer and the Department of Electricity and the Consumer Affairs Department the bill was agreed to be settled at the tune of Rs.5786/- and 380/- for the month of July, 2017 to March, 2018 and also April to June, 2018. This Complainant paid that bill on 26.03.2018 and 03.05.2018 respectively. But after payment of that amount on 03.05.2018, this Complainant received another bill on 05.07.2018 for the month of July and September when Electric Department claimed Rs.4058/- with mentioning 2883/- as outstanding amount. But fact to say after settlement of all bills how this Electric Department can claim outstanding amount at the tune of Rs.2883/-. Practically after 03.05.2018 there no outstanding demand remains. The O.P. adopting unfair trade practice raised such illegal bills. It is appropriate to mention that from the bills, it is clear that the O.P. claiming such outstanding for obtaining the remaining amount of bill dated 05.01.2018 ignoring the settlement and bill dated 24.03.2018. Complainant raised objection of the bill on 29.08.2018, 24.01.2019 and 18.04.2019 respectively. But his objection was not considered on the contrary O.P. continuously sending the bills on taking into consideration of outstanding amount of Rs.2883/-. Complainant again went to the Consumer Affairs Department but on 18.03.2019 no fruitful result made there. Hence he approached before this Forum or Commission. He prays for correction of bills dated 05.07.2018 and subsequent bills by way of removing outstanding amount and for compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for his pain and agony and Rs.20,000/- as litigation cost.
O.P.-Electric Department contested this case contending, inter alia, on the allegations of the Complainant and as per their (Electric Department ) submission since installation of the electricity, bills were sent by the Department to the consumer as per actual consumption and this Complainant as consumer almost all time did not pay the bills in due time. Hence for non-payment in due time, surcharge of all bills were increasing day after day. This Complainant paid bill for the period July 2017 to June, 2018 by installment. After that for the period of July, 2018 to September, 2018 Rs.4058/- was raised and the bill was sent on 05.07.2018 and at that bill Rs.2883/- was shown as outstanding dues for LPSC and since thereafter the bills for energy was claimed as per actual consumption of this Complainant - Consumer but the Complainant has not paid those bills rather through a letter dated 18.04.2019 he prays an installment of all bills which was sent as per his consumption. Fact to say this letter dated 18.04.2019 is nothing but to evade the payment of his consumption. Actually this Complainant without making arrangement to pay outstanding demand of Rs.11, 786/- up to 01.10.2019 with an ill motive to avoid the legitimate claim of the Department filed this instant case. This case is fit to be dismissed instantly.
Moreover, the act itself says under Section 42 (5) & (6) that the cases of these types are not maintainable to this Commission or Forum. For such cases Regulatory Commission is proper authority to hear such disputes. Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2007 (8) SCC Page No.381 in Para No.7 clearly says that when complete machinery has been provided for redressal of grievances of the consumer of Electricity and the Forum of ombudsman have been created the consumer can only resort to those bodies for redressal of grievances and this observation of Hon’ble Apex Court still exist. So in view of the above written statement the case is subject to be dismissed with cost.
Decision with Reasons
In order to substantiate the claim of the Complainant he examined himself and filed some documents i.e., paid bill dated 28.03.2017 and its receipt and impugned bill dated 05.07.2017, 05.01.2018 and subsequent bills and the application before the Consumer Affairs for settlement which remains under Page Nos.5 to 23.
On perusal of written argument as well as hearing of the respective Counsel of the Complainant, We find, he alleged that after settlement on 25.01.2018 on the amount of Rs. 5746/- and Rs.380/- for the Month of July, 2017 to June 2018 and its payment there will be no question of any outstanding payment in respect of bill dated 05.07.2018 for the period July 2018 to September 2018. In the aforesaid bill O.P. claimed Rs.4018/- and mentioned Rs.2883/- as outstanding demand or amount and this outstanding amount of Rs.2883/- is impugned one which has no substantiality after the payment of Rs. 5786/- and Rs.380/- as per tripartite agreement before the Consumer Affairs Department. But this O.P. being an Electric Department without giving any respects to the tripartite agreement further demanded this Rs.2883/- as remained outstanding and wanted to realize the same through impugned bill (i.e., 05.07.2018). So, it is nothing but an adopting unfair trade practice of the Department as Opposite Party on raising such illegal bill on the contention of the outstanding one. Practically speaking the bill dated 05.01.2018 through which a demand was placed at a tune of Rs.8, 217/- the remaining amount of that bill was wanted to be realized by the Department declaring the amount of Rs.2883/- as outstanding through the bill dated 05.07.2018 for the Month of July, 2018 to September, 2018. So this demand of outstanding amount of Rs.2883/- in break up condition by the bill is an unfair trade practice on the part of the Electric Department to claim again as outstanding amount after the settlement through tripartite agreement before Consumer Affairs Department. But this Complainant as consumer in no way liable to pay this outstanding amount which not at all in existence after the tripartite agreement and payment of bills as per installment bill dated 24.03.2018 and 27.04.2018. Through W.N.A. and by argument, Complainant further stated that the Opposite Party at his W/V and W.N.A. has taken defense of non maintainability of the instant case on the ground that Ld. Commission has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the present case because any complaint raised against Section 126 of Electricity Act, 2003 should be adjudicated either by Regulatory Commission or by Ombudsman. But Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.4566 of 2012 that is the case U.P. Power Construction Ltd. Vs. Anis Ahamed which decided on 01.07.2013 clearly held that in case of inconsistency between the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 the provision of Consumer Protection Act will prevail and Electricity Act and C.P. Act, 1986 will run parallel for giving redressal to any person who falls within the meaning of consumer u/S. 2(1) (d) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Accordingly, as per observation of Hon’ble Apex Court, this Complainant being consumer have well reason to lodge his grievance before this Commission or to get relief considering this illegal demand of Rs.2883/- as outstanding one. Ld. Counsel of Complainant further argued that the second point of defense what has been taken by the O.P. or Electric- Department that this Rs.2883/- is LPSC but nowhere in the impugned bill they stated it that, it is nothing but a charge of LPSC. At the time of settlement they also did not mention regarding the future applicability of LPSC charge rather entire matter of payment or dispute was settled at the tune of Rs.5746/- and Rs.380/- respectively. Further to be mentioned in the bill dated 05.07.2018 it appears that O.Ps have mentioned the amount of LPSC as ‘0.04’, therefore it is clear that the allegation or clarification of the Opposite parties about the impugned amount of Rs. 2883/-as outstanding is baseless and self made story about LPSC. So, the contention of the O.P. has no footing to stand about their outstanding demand.
On the other dogma it is noticed that Electric Department through their Written Version as well as argument vehemently wanted to discard this Forum as a Redressal forum of the Complainant. Showing the observation of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 2007(8) SCC Page No.381 wanted to convince this Commission not to entertain such type of cases on the observation by the Apex Court that when complete machinery has been provided for the redressal of grievance of individual consumer and wherever a forum of Regulatory Commission or Ombudsman have been created the consumer can only resort to those bodies for redressal. Ld. O.P.-Counsel vehemently opposed on saying that any order of officer u/S.126 of Electricity Act, 2003 should be challenged either before Regulatory Commission or before Ombudsman on this strength of observation by Hon’ble Apex Court in the year 2007 and after that no observation was passed to discard it by the Hon’ble Apex Court that the Commission/Forum has any right to entertain it.
Ld. Electricity Counsel further argued that if for argument sake this Commission got any jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter but it is admitted position that this consumer is an habitual defaulter with regard to payment of dues and for which he had to approach again and again for the settlement either before Consumer Affairs Department or to the Department of Electricity. He never used to pay energy bill regularly in time on previous occasion. For that reason he was made to pay an installment for the month of July, 2017 to June 2018 and that bill also not paid in time by him against which surcharge was raised as outstanding one in the bill dated 05.07.2018 for the period of July, 2018 to September, 2018 at the tune of Rs. 4058/- including LPSC as outstanding one. Since thereafter the energy charge have been claimed as per regular consumption but till now no payment was made against any bill as send by the Department. On the contrary by a letter dated 18.04.2019 he again prays for an installment behind his outstanding dues against unpaid bills. So, motive of the Complainant is almost mala fide one and at present Department is entitled to get outstanding dues from him at the tune of Rs.11,776/- up to 01.10.2019.
Now We the Commission on hearing the respective contentions of the Complainant and O.P.-Electric Department finds that the crux of litigation or non- payment of impugned Electric bill only lies with the amount of Rs.2886/- which is sent by the Department as outstanding dues. The Complainant as consumer demands it as unfair claim or trade practice of the Department, which is asked from him in the bill dated 05.07.2018. We further notice, on mentioning the bill dated 24.03.2018 and 27.04.2018 on settlement, Complainant do not want to recognize about any LPSC charge because at that impugned bill dated 05.07.2018, LPSC charge was mentioned as 0.04 that means only four paisa.
We the Commission from the impugned bill find that this statement of Complainant is correct, when practically through the Bill dated 05.07.2018 LPSC charge was declared as 0.04. Naturally this Commission fails to understand after full settlement and paying the bill dated 24.03.2018 and 27.04.2018 for the period July, 2017 to June, 2018 how this outstanding demand is being made. The Electric Department nowhere shows this Commission that after settlement what outstanding remains on payment. Though on seeing the Foot-Note No.1 and Foot-Note No.2 of the bill dated 24.03.2018 and 27.04.2018 it were mentioned that “Late payment surcharge (LPSC) has not been included in above installment amounts. Applicable LPSC for the period between the due date of original bill and actual payment date of installment will be claimed in the subsequent energy bill as per regulation framed by WBERC’ and as per Note No.2- ‘failure of installment payment within due date/dates as stated above will lead cancellation of installment order and disconnection of supply without any further notice”.
So from the above foot-noted notification under the two bills dated 24.03.2018 and 27.04.2018 gave rise to the Electric Department to claim LPSC. The Complainant paid the settlement amount at the tune of Rs.5,746/- & Rs.380/- respectively and in fact we find the bill dated 24.03.2018 was paid on 26.03.2018 when the payment of due date was 27.03.2018 and the bill dated 27.04.2018 was paid on 03.05.2018 when the payment due date was 02.05.2018 that means one day delay in payment of bill dated 27.04.2018 but no delay on the bill dated 24.03.2018. Accordingly through the impugned bill, LPSC charge was mentioned as 0.04 for one days delay for the bill dated 27.04.2018 but no delay in payment of bill dated 24.03.2018.
Eventually the argument as placed by the O.P. Counsel that this outstanding of Rs.2,883/- is nothing but LPSC charge for the late payment of settled amount for the period of July 2017 to June 2018 has no legs to stand. By any cogent document the Department of Electricity did not convince this Commission about this amount of outstanding for what period? Either previous to the settlement or non-payment of surcharge on the settle amount in time.
Accordingly, this Commission has no option but to declare this amount of Rs.2,883/- as an unreasonable charge declaring it as outstanding one against the impugned bill dated 05.07.2018 when there no question of outstanding arise after settlement or it’s amount and payment of it.
Consequently, Electricity Department is directed to give fresh bill to this Consumer/Complainant correcting the bill dated 05.07.2018 on deduction of Rs.2,883/- and to take rest amount of Rs.1175/-(i.e.,Rs.4058 minus Rs.2883/- equals to Rs.1175/-) as Electric consumption of the Complainant for that period. Complainant is directed to pay the amount of corrected bill as sent by the O.P.-Electricity Department as per order aforesaid within seven days from the date of the receipt of the bill; otherwise LPSC charge will be applicable on the corrected bill.
But this order is not binding on any subsequent bills as given by the Electric Department after dated 05.07.2018 (which impugned one) and this amount of Rs.2883/- will not be carry forward at any subsequent bill.
Electric Department is entitled to take LPSC charges for the late payment of consumption bill since after the corrected bill dated 05.07.2018 and to onwards bill.
Regarding the point of maintainability as raised the O.P. Electric Department , Commission opined, the observation of Hon’ble Apex Court vide Civil Appeal No.5466 of 2012 dated 1st July , 2013 is obeyed by and the Commission considers the Consumer-Complaint as maintainable to this Commission as being a domestic electrification of this consumer.
Hence it is
O R D E R E D
that the Complainant is in success to the effect on the direction to the Electric Department (O.P.) to cancel the impugned bill dated 05.07.2018 and to send a fresh bill for the impugned period (July,2018 to September,2018) with effect to deduct an amount of Rs.2883/- as outstanding amount which remained in the impugned bill.
The Complainant is directed to pay the amount of corrected bill as and when send/given by the Electric Department within seven days of its receipt, otherwise entitle to pay LPSC as per Rules and Regulation of Electric Department .
This Order is not operative on any subsequent bills as raised by the Electric Department for the consumption of the consumer.
No other cost is allotted to the Complainant as per his claim.
Let a copy of this or be given to the parties on free of cost.
Dictated and corrected by me.
President
D.C.D.R.C., Purba Bardhaman.
Member President
D.C.D.R.C., Purba Bardhaman D.C.D.R.C., Purba Bardhaman
Let the record be sent to the record room through the Registrar for necessary action.
