DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24-PARGANAS, JUDGES’ COURT,
ALIPORE, KOLKATA-700 027
>> C.C. CASE NO.: 64 OF 2009 <<
DATE OF FILING: 9.3.2009
DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT: 31.07.2009
_ ____.____._____.____._____._____._____.____.______._____._____.____.______.___ _
c >|< c >|< c >< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c >|< c
l
Present : President : Dipak Shyam Roy
Member(s) : Amitabha Roy Chowdhury & Sharmi Basu
________________________________________________________________________
COMPLAINANT : Sri Ajay Biswas, s/o late Upendranath Biswas,
Baruipur S.D. Hospital, Citu Quarter, P.O. Baruipur,
P.S. Baruipur, Dist. 24 Parganas (S)
- >> : versus : << -
O. P. / O. PS : 1. WBSEDCL , Assistant Engineer,
Baruipur Group Electricity Baruipur, Dist. 24 Parganas (S)
2. Bankim Ghosh, Assistant Engineer, Baruipur Group
Electricity Baruipur, Dist. 24 Parganas (S)
________________________________________________________________________
>> J U D G E M E N T <<
________________________________________________________________________
The complainant Shri Ajay Biswas has filed this petition under Section 12 of the C.P Act alleging deficiency in service against the O.Ps WBSEDCL .
In a nutshell, the case of the complainant is that the complainant is a bonafide consumer of O.Ps from the year of 2007, vide Service Connection no. BRP-2334E , Consumer no. 013713, under category of domestic connection and he has paid the electric bills regularly. After having electric connection, in the first year the billing amounts in against of his service connection were normal and reasonable. But, after that the O.Ps started to raise absurd bills of excess amount, which were erroneous as per the complainant. The complainant lastly received a bill dated 14.2.2009 amounting Rs. 2,219/- which was absurd and abnormally excess. As per the complainant, he informed in writing to the O.P2 about these erroneous bills through letters dated 21.11.2007 , 22.12.2007, 25.8.2008 , 3.9.2008 and 26.2.2009 and in these letters he also requested the O.Ps to replace his meter by a defect free new meter. But all in vein. The complainant submits that under the backdrop of harassment and injustice by O.Ps, he has come before this Forum for redress. Therefore, the complainant prays for an order upon the O.Ps with a direction to cancel the absurd bill dated 14.2.2009 and to raise a reasonable bill for that time period and to replace the defective meter with a new defect less meter. In the instant case O.Ps have appeared through Ld. Advocate but neither filed written version nor was present on the date of hearing on argument. Hence, the case was heard exparte against the O.Ps.
Point for consideration:
Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons:
We have examined all the documents filed by the complainant and heard his Ld. Advocate . WBSEDCL did not contest the case. Now the complainant is a “Consumer” under the C.P Act ,as because, he is consuming electricity from WBSEDCL by paying the amount of electricity bills regularly. In the instant case, the complainant prays for direction upon the O.Ps to cancel the absurd bill dated 14.2.2009 and to raise a reasonable bill and to replace the defective meter with a new defect free meter. On the other side, the O.Ps appeared before this Forum but after having several opportunities did not contest the case and the case has been heard exparte. It is observed from the tri-monthly consumption for the month of May, 2007 to July,2007, November 2007 to January, 2008, February 2008 to April,2008 , May, 2008 to July,2008 and August, 2008 to October, 2008 were 420 units ,240 units, 235 units, 150 units and 281 units respectively. But as per the document the trimonthly consumption for the months of August, 2007 to October, 2007 was 572 unit and for the months of November, 2008 to January, 2008 was 700 units. The complainant gave a petition on 21.11.2007 to the O.P to replace the existing meter after receiving the bill for the month of August, 2007 to October, 2007 amounting to Rs. 1,862/-. Thereafter, he gave number of applications for replacement of defective meter but no response was given by the O.Ps. It was found from the documents that in the bills dated 15.11.2007 and 14.2.2009 the consumption units and bill amounts are exceptionally higher than other bills. Moreover, the O.Ps did not give any attention after receiving number of letters of the complainant. As per the C.P Act, 1986 , it is the responsibility of the “Service Provider” to take necessary action and to give reply to the application of the “Consumer” within a reasonable time. In the instant case O.Ps neither gave reply to the letters of the complainant nor did take any action to redress the dispute of the complainant. The conduct of the O.Ps before this Forum clearly indicates that they neglected to contest the case by placing before this Forum the actual position of the consumption of electricity by the complainant and also to produce any evidence to prove that the meter was not defective. In the above circumstances we have no other alternative but to accept the unchallenged testimony of the complainant, who was alleged that there was some absurdity of the bill and consequently suggesting that the meter was defective. Therefore, we are in the opinion that the WBSEDCL has committed deficiency in service . Moreover, from the records it is beyond doubt that the disputed bill of electricity dated 14.2.2009 amounting to Rs. 2219/- was enormously higher than most of the previous bills, except one previous bill dated 15.11.2007 amounting to Rs. 1862/- . It appears that as per the complainant that bill was also erroneous and he prayed in writing to the O.Ps for replacement of defective meter after receiving that erroneous bill. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the bill dated 14.2.2009 is a erroneous bill and the O.Ps should cancel that absurd bill and should raise a bill in light of the average of the bills from the month of November, 2007 to October, 2008. We are also of the opinion that the WBSEDCL should replace the meter with a new meter which should be free from any defect. Therefore, the complaint is allowed without cost.
Hence Ordered
That the case of the complainant is allowed exparte without cost. The O.Ps are is directed to cancel the erroneous bill dated 14.2.2009 which was in the name of the complainant vide Consumer no. B013713 for the consumption period from November, 2008 to January, 2008 and to send a fresh bill for that period in the light of average of the bills from the month of November, 2007 to October, 2008. The O.Ps are also directed to replace the old defective meter with a new one, which should be free from any defect. The O.Ps are directed to comply this order within one month from this date of order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to file an execution case under Section 25 or 27 of the C.P Act.
Member Member President
Dictated and corrected by me
SHARMI BASU ( Member )